The Triptich at Tamworth Castle.
The Triptich consists of three heraldic panels sequentially numbered 53, 54 and 55 in a Commemorative Collection numbering 61, on the ceiling-corniches of the State Withdrawing Room and the Breackfast Parlour, on the first floor at Tamworth Castle in Staffordshire. These rooms have a fireplace each, back to back through a shared wall. There are a total of sixty one heraldic panels similarly painted, in these rooms, all quartered per pale to commemorate marriages by and to the House of Ferrers, with a few exceptions, a few being individual Arms, the one about Sir George Vere-Ferrers-Townshend, either the 16th or 17th Baron Ferrers de Chartley, Knight of Tamworth Castle, Baron Compton, Marquess of Townshend of Raynham, Earl of Leicester, being multi-quartered, displaying 28 Arms.
Most Arms are in the State Withdrawing Room as this is the larger of the two, the Tryptich being on the ceiling-corniche direcly above the fireplace, however, although being the smaller room, the Breackfast Parlour displays right onto the fireplace a magnificently carved oack-panel showing a COA of 12 quarterings, complete with Crest, Supporting Animals, Motto, War Cry and Mantling, at the centre of a corniche of symbols and mythical characters, favourite fruits, animals, some of which have esoteric links to Templar and Illuminati-thought and beliefs.
I discovered this to be the COA of Sir Robert ( Sewallis or Seswalo...the ancient pre-conquest surname of the Shirley ) Shirley-Ferrers 1692-1714,
( died sine prole ) Viscount Tamworth 1711 , son of Anne Ferrers heiress of Sir Humphrey Ferrers, who died in 1678, who married Robert Shirley, who died in 1698.
The series was commissioned in the times of the Hannoverian Dynasty (1714-1901 ), following the fall of the Stuart Dynasty ( 1603-1714 ), as panel 54 appears to refer to the reign of King James II ( 1685-1689 ), just before whose reign, John Ferrers, the last Ferrers Knight of Tamworth had died, in 1680. His daughter Anne had then inherited the Honour of the Knighthood of Tamworth Castle which was passed on to the son of her marriage to Robert Shirley Esq., who died in 1698, yes, her son Robert of the same name as the father, (1692-1714 ) who styled himself Viscount Tamworth in 1711.
Robert Shirley died without issue, and all Ferrers’ resources assembled in turn in the hands of the Shirley, the Compton, the Townshend, the Ferrers of Baddesley-Clinton being unable to accede to these probably owing to their lack of adequate rank, in spite of the marriage of Edward Ferrers of Baddesley-Clinton to the Ferrers-Townshend-heiress, Lady Harriet Ann Townshend, who died in 1813.
Owing to the presence in the series of the already mentioned, multi-quartered Coat of Arms of a Sir George Vere-Ferrers-Townshend, Marquess of Townshend,
either the 16th (1755-1811 ) or the 17th Baron Ferrers de Chartley ( 1788-1855), both of the same name, and with the same Titles and Honours, it is quite possible one of these two gentlemen may have been the one to have either commissioned or at least to have had the works completed.
There are a few errors, either pertaining to heraldic representation or of an historical nature in the Arms of the collection.
Although the principal aim----------there being several goals aimed at in the collection of heraldic nuptial Coat of Arms, all discussed in my book------appears to be to summarise and commemorate the most influential alliances with other noble Houses, since the beginning of the House of Ferrers at the landing at Hastings from Normandie, then known in the Latin used in those times all over Europe for legal purposes, as de Ferrariis, the Triptich holds a central position in the Nuptial Collection and focuses on the Britishness of the Ferrers by its summary of the links of this House with the Scottish Crown and its British traditions and aspirations, about which Sir Laurence Gardner ( of St.Clair, the traditional hereditary guardian of Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland ) writes so well and extensively in his books about the Holy Graal and the sacred Desposyniic Dynasties. Gardner fails however to ask vital questions about the failures of the Desposyniic ( Davidic ) Lines, thus also failing to seek suitable answers and to synthetise this knowledge for our times, a task I am trying to accomplish.
The three panels of the Triptich are in fact floating in a badckground of five-petal Rosae Rugosae or Templar Roses, pink and silver, which symbolise par excellence the Holy Graal tradition of the British Monarchy .
Let me quote from page 286 of Sir Laurence Gardner’s “ The Bloodline of the Grail Kings ”-:
On 26th March 1371 the Royal House of 6th century Arthur [ b. 599- d. 603 ] mac Aedan of Dalraida, the key Graal successions of Britain and Europe had conjoined in Scots Royalty, and the Stewarts’ ancient legacy of kinship was fulfilled.
Unquote.
Another Article in my book shows the links of the House of Ferrers to the Order of the Knights Templar since its origins, their contributions to and participations in the affairs of the Order, founded by Sir Godfrey de Bouillon, under the instigation and inspiration of Saint Bernard de Clairveaux, the reformer of the Cistercian ( Cluniac ) Monastic Order along stricter Benedectine Rules, until the loss of the Earldom of Derby at the time of the eighth and last Earl, Sir Robert Ferrers ( 1241-1279 ).
I shall come back in this Article, to this stage of Ferrers’ history, which has been much maligned and misrepresented by most historians slavishly protecting the reputation of the English Royal Dynasties of the Plantagenets and of the Tudors, among whom there were some really abominable and diabolical Kings, worthy of the worst and sinister side of their ancient barbaric anscestors. Being of the blood of Jesus has not been, does not necessarily mean a guarantee of sanctity as God’s Will, Grace and the assent to God’s Grace by the individual are required.
Both King David and Sholomon were corrupt, King Arthur was incestuous with his sister and we all know about King Henry VIII of the Tudor Dynasty.
Being related to Jesus can mean however a natural ( inherited ) predisposition to and openness to Grace.
Origins in accordance to blood and flesh/ancestry do not really count unless ideals of the spirit are also embraced and made visible into one’s praxis. Please remember Galatians 3:28.
Digression.
In a short but necessary digression, it is important to note that all modern democratic ideals of personal liberties, freedoms and priviledges, unless complemented by their corresponding duties are but shallow and hollow, aimed by abusers at justifying the liberties of corrupt leaders and rulers, including present Mafiosi ( i.e., anti-society, anti-civilisation, anti-State ), Repubblican Governments ( a typical example being Italy to-day, in 2009). These abusers of Modern Democracy claim in fact to be democratic while abusing and corrupting the ideals of freedom by separating these from their corresponding complementary duties, and by neglecting a suitable and satisfactory education of the people, alienating these from their histories, noble traditions and heroic, sometimes saintly, referential witnesses, thus giving rise to generations of Pinocchio-like individuals, who have lost most of the knowledge of their national and even personal identities/histories/ glories/honours, becoming open to the evil, shallow manipulations of their soulless, mercenary leaders who fill these with hollow heroes taken from ball games, sports, the stages etc., a repetition in a different, bloodless form, of the Gladatorial Games of corrupt Imperial Rome.
All Modern Democratic ideals had their origins in the Golden Age of Greece which reached its peak at the times of the ostracised, exhiled, persecuted oligarch Pericles, the last of the true, noble Greeks, and were championed and implemented in Medieval Europe, before the rise of the corrupt National Monarchies, by the Templar Movement which has its roots in the times of King Zedekiah
( 597-587 ) of Judah, martired by his Assyrian captors, whose daughter TAMAR was brought to Ireland by either the Prophet Ezekiel or Jeremiah together with the Royal Guards of the Temple of Jerusalem or Sion ( the anscestors of the Templars) and married in ca. 586 BC, to EOCHAID I, the King of the Irish, giving rise to the ‘Stone Royal Dynasty’ reaching down to UGAINE MAR THE GREAT of Ireland in the 4th century BC and from the latter down to the ‘Royal Scots and Welsh Dynasties’ of ARTHUR OF DALRIADA and ARTHUR OF DYFED in the 9th century AD.
One must also mention at this stage, the other judaeo/christian alliances through Jesus and Mary Magdalene, James of Arimathea and other intermarriages between Celtic, Gothic and Shythian Princes during their migrations from the Caspian Sea to Northern Europe and its islands, begun in ca. 6000 BC and even earlier prehistoric mediterranean semitic ones to the prehistoric anscestors of Cro-Magnon origins of the mentioned Celtic/Gothic/Shythian groups, which occurred in ca. 30,000, prior to the Last Glacial Maximum ( L.G.M.) that occurred between 25,000 and 13,000 BC.
There is also a publication from The Covenanmt Publishing Co. Ltd., London, “ The Royal House of Britain an Enduring Dynasty ” by Rev. W. M. H. Milner......which gives at page 21 a genealogical list not much differing from the one supplied by Sir Laurence Gardner. We are not here concerned swith exact details but must be contented with the fact the agreement about this pre-historical data is close enough.
In the former document Tamar is rendered Tea Tephi of Tara and the prophet Ezekiel ( some say it was Jeremiah...............The fact is a Hebrew prophet was involved who was in charge of the Guards of the Temple of Jerusalem in the times of King Zedekiah of Judah. ) was by the Irish called Olam Folla. According to the ancient Epics, Tamar married, sometime after her father’s death in 587 B.C., a Milesian ( from Miletus/Greece ) Prince of Celtic origins with ancient origins origins in the area around the Caspian Sea in 6000-4000 B.C., whom she met in Spain during their migrations to Ireland where they soon landed founding a
Dynasty that gave rise to the Royal Irish and Scottish Houses, through which the existing Stewart ( Stuart ) line as well as those of all Desposyniic European Monarchies can be traced.
One must also mention at this stage the other judaeo/christian alliances through Jesus and Mary Magdalene, James of Arimathea and other intermarriages between Celtic, Gothic, and Scythian Princes during their migrations from the Caspian and Black Seas to Europe and its remote northern islands which began in ca. 6000 B.C.. One must not forget even earlier pre-pre-historic migrations by mediterranean semitic people of the ‘E’, ‘I’ ,’J’, ‘K’, etc. Y-DNA Blood Haplogroups, who mixed with the Cro-Magnon anscestors of the mentioned Celtic/Gothic/Scythian groups, of the ‘R’ group which occurred in ca. 30,000 B.C., prior to the last Glacial Maimum ( L.G.M.) that occurred between 25,000 and 13,000 B.C.
Constantinianism, which marked during the early centuries of the first millennium A.D., the divergence of Roman Catholicism from the Israelitic brand of Christianiyt of Jesus’ followers, although motivated in the times following Emperor Constantine’s death, ( who was incidentally a Desposynic Ruler through st.Helena, his saintly mother’s anscestry ), by then plausible historical and political reasons, has attempted during the first centuries of the Roman Christian Church to erase or somehow manipulate all these memories and origins and give Western History an exclusively Latin/Hebrew-dressing. However to-day, when this dressing has become alienated and corrupted by the rise to power on the waves of a corrupted and abused Democracy, of the moneyed, collusive, scheming, sinister, goat-herders and shepperds, ex-slaves brought into Europe by the naive Romans, or later Barbarian Invaders, who are also religious hypocrits, to-day has the time come to bring these memories and traditions back, to purge Constantinianism from its Mafia accretions, affiliations and infiltrations, to reform, revive Christianity, and save Western Civilisation and its democratic achievements, by looking back to the original Templar understandings about a healthy and godly government. It is important to remember that the Scottish King Robert The Bruce ( 1306-1329 ) gave sanctuary in Scotland to the Members of the Order of the Templars which is still active there in hiding, its ideals also being still alive to-day.
The Stuart Dynasty ( 1603-1714 ) tried to spread these ideals for the benefit of Europe, however England was then bent onto becoming a World Empire, a process begun under the Tudors and the religious wars among christian hypocrits and fanatics of various denominations, who made a mockery of Democratic Ideals, destroyed their well-intentioned attempts. The English Empire is now no more and the Tudors fizzed out in a couple of generations, killed by STDs contracted by King Henry VIII, paradoxically also a Desposyniic Royal. England ( I do not say Britain ), although still in better moral shape than Italy, France, the Balcans and the USA, etc. is fast degenerating too under Anglo-Saxon laissais-fairism which is not Democracy but its corrupted form.
. We all realise now in the Era I qualify as “of Manure ”, the catastrophic events the Western World and the whole world have had to endure since the French Revolution and the Era of Enlightenment, without any real or permanent political progress, including the rise of Neo-Islamism, global demographic expansion and a great wastage of resources that are threatening to obliterate Western achievements.
With the rise of a United Europe a possibility has now eventuated for another attempt at returning Law and Order to governing bodies infiltrated by moneyed power groups ( vulgarly called Mafie) who are so mercenary, selfish and stupid, as to not be able to realise the number of further catastrophic events looming at the horizon of their self-deluding ways. The Mafie have ruined the USA, are sabotaging Europe, and even Australia, a Continent the Cities of which can show such a transparency due to their open and clean areas and suburbs that organised crime should not be able to exist, is fighting a loosing war against Organised Crime since, even the High Police Force Commissioner has admitted the goal is now to just maintain existing Crime manageable. We are referring here principally to the drugs’ traffic that is damaging our young generations for which so much money is being invested when adolescents, a great deal of which is being wasted due to the damage caused by substance-abuse and a lack of identity. The inability to effectively hit Crime is the result of Democratic Laws that insist in dealing with it with an excessive amount of safeguards protecting the Criminal. Drug-users should also be prosecuted and punished. Gentlemen are required at all governmental levels, not just a couple of them as puppets at the top, members of the ancient noble Houses. In order to get these gentlemen to leading positions, the restauration of all Desposyniic Monarchs is required, joined into Monarchich Assemblies, with elected Monarchich leaders, ranked in accordance to their educational achievements and experiences, according to merit, working together to balance and check Parliaments, Senates, Congresses, all governmental levels, through series of Permanent Royal Commissions, in relation to issues of corruption, selfishness, delusionary fraudolent practices ( including bubbles of all sorts and descriptions ), monopolies, in relation to all moneyed powers in the Western Nations. These Monarchich Assemblies would also ensure the protection, survival and perpetuation of our Western Cultures, Traditions, Languages, Values/Ideals, Religious Beliefs and Liberties from the infiltrations, encroachments and take-overs of foreign, alien, opponents, mostly masquerading as Immigrants or lovers of Democracy.
The West should remain open to adoption of Immigrants but these Immigrants should be West-Lovers, else they should remain where they came from, not emigrate just for the sake of acquiring political rights and to benefit from higher standards of living and being. These people, if serious, should remain in their own Countries and actively fight their corrupt leaders if needs be through armed
Revolutions.
There is no room for loafers and fake pacifists in our World. There has never ben a place for these fakes and yellow bellies, unless they are prepared to renounce the world like some ancient catholic, buddhist or islamic saints did.
These Immigrants must either fight their Revolutions at home or be prepared to fight in our armies.
End of Digression.
The Triptich is a Templar legacy for the Ferrers who are members of “gensferreria/ferraria/farrar ”. The reason for my spending so much time and effort in researching the Ferrers is therefore in the fact that they are Desposyniic, have these strong Templar links, which have also existed in other European families of “gensferreria ” as exemplified by the Arms of the Ferrari of Genova, have behaved extremely well when compared to noble families from the Middle Ages, surviving by the Grace of God until our present times, having given rise to this Clan which is unique in the History of Europe, and can be used as an example of Desposyniic excellence, in spite of the general failure of Desposyniic Monarchies. This legacy, this tradition, being of a spiritual rather than a material nature, can serve as an archetype for all those in the West who have descended from Celts, Goths and Scythian tribes who as the “gensferreria....... ” migrated to Europe from the Middle East prior to the establishment of the civilised borders of the Roman Empire. The Triptich is about all these issues I have written above, once one has taken the step and made the effort to know the History it has been associated with, this history having been interpreted correctly in the spirit of Galatians 3:28 sith which I try to permeate my historical, theological, phylosophical, escatological, etc. world-view.
The abridged Genealogical Charts preceding this Article have been supplied to provide some of the landmarks required for this understanding of the imperfect/flawed human resources and their progress in experience, evolution, distance and time and of the European scenario, which gave rise to the Templar movement from its Biblical origins in the times of King Zedekiah ( 597-587 B.C.), of the Prophet Ezekiel/Jeremiah, the Temple of Jerusalem and its Body of Guards of Syon.
The Triptich begs the honest and enlightened reader to ask and to consider the question why did all these somehow well-intentioned Nobles and Monarchs,
related to the Davidic Lion of Judah, to the Royal House of Israel FAIL?
The House of Ferrers at least, which is a member ot the Clan of “gensferreria/ferraria/shirleia/farria” as well as of the wider Desposyniic Davidic Circle, has always been extremely well intentioned and behaved better than most, when contrasted to various Dynastic and noble Houses, all fallen along the way.
It still has to-day, representatives at the House of Lords as the Earl Ferrers.The explanation asked above about the reasons for all this failure, a question which is not asked or answered by Sir Laurence Gardner ( who as a claimant to the title of Knight St. Clair should know better than anyone else ) and the present descendants of the ancient Desposynic Monarchies, still bent on and bound to try and repeat the errors of the Past, if allowed to do so, is the spirit of all-exclusive pride, greed and murderous competition that animated all these Desposynic Monarchs, as well as their predecessors, since the Fall of the Roman Empire of the West in ca. 450 A.D., who tried to eliminate one another in continuous fratricidal wars, including and up to WW I, falsely motivated to unending wars against the ideal of a Christian European Unity, under the mutually balanced supervision of the Sacred Roman Empire and of a truly spiritual Christian Church.
One must consider at this stage that the beginning of the fratricidal rot in the West was the usurpation by the Carolingian Dynasty, under the
encouragement of the Roman Church ot those times, of the rights of the Merovingian Dynasty, issuing from the ancient Line of the Fishers Kings that was from King Clovis the Merovingian, who had become King ofthe Salian Franks in 481 A.D. with the blessings of both the western and the eastern Roman Emperors. This usurpation began anew a chain of treacheries that reflected those of the Roman Empire when oaths had ceased to have sacred importance in western culture.
Western man must be retaught the sacredness of oath-taking and a
return should be seeked to the most possible pristine oaths taken at the end of the Western Roman Empire.
The interferences of the Constantinian Church in Rome aimed to generate an Imperial hyerarchy totally dependent from and submissive to the Roman Church and tried to achieve this aim by manipulations and exclusions of scriptural texts ( at the council of Nicea and later ones ), by the total Judaization/Latinisation of the biblical sources, by reducing the importance of all mesopotamian cultural and ethnic contributions, the removal of Desposyniic mandates and missions from the nordic Royal Lines that had intemarried with the Davidic descendants, etc.. As a contrast one can see in the Empire of Byzathium the opposite scenario, one in which the Church was obedient to the Emperors, not without struggles or violence though. So one observes the struggles between Church and State for dominance in Europe, and the evil rise of competing
Monarchies in Europe encouraging and stressing un-Christian, nationalistic divisons with the Roman Church’s blessings. Sir Laurence Gardner speacks well in his works of these manipulations, in spite of his inability to synthetise what he knows for our times. A typical example is the incorporation by the Jews in the Pentateuch, of the racial Noetic story of God’s rejection of the blacks, when we all know that Moses
himself, Joseph of Egypt, Aaron, Akhenaten, Nephertitis etc. had marked dark skins and ethiopic features. So Michelangelo ended painting God as a white patriarch on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and the Hebrew Scholars still debate whether Adam was of the white race and God Itself white.
This is why “gensferreria/ferraria/farria” is such a unique phenomenon in Europe and in the world, since the members of this Clan, unconsciously retained in their surnames, by remaining at least true to their surnames-: i.e., in the Latin irregular verb fero-tuli-latum-ferre................the evidence of their common ancestral roots. This amidst the chaos and disorder of European history, like the struggles between Welfs and Ghibellines and those caused by the religious wars, just to name a couple of issues that caused divisions, enmities and dissents.
I am not against Roman Catholicism and Democracy which I wish to synthetically retain as one of the major western forces, but pointing to a need for reformation and truth.
This is why I am suggesting to-day a restauration of all existing surviving Monarchs to the ancient European seats of Monarchich Government, under democratically controlled conditions and safeguards, afforded by modern Media and Communications, benefiting from the new realisations and understandings afforded by our present knowledge of History, interpreted according to the lines pointed out here in this Article.
These Monarchs should have advisory and legislative powers in parallel with Parliaments, Congresses, Senates, etc. and would provide a guarantee of thre perpetuation and safeguarding of our cultural tradition and heritage from opponents and infiltrators, due to the fact they would only be allowed to inter-marry within their European, christian, historical circles, in the same way Islamic Monarchs, see Saudi Arabia, have been doing and are doing even to-day.
Panel 55 of the Triptich shows the marriage alliance, his second marriage, between Sir William Ferrers, the seventh Earl of Derby, wrongly designated in the Panel as the 2nd Earl, to Margaret de Quincy, the eldest daughter and co-heiress from the marriage of Roger de Quincy, the Earl of Winchester, to Helen, daughter of Lord Alain of Galloway and Margaret of Anguss & Huntingdon.
The House of Anguss & Huntingdon, being related to David the King of Scots (1124-1153), and to Hugh II ( Keveliok ) the fifth Earl of Chester,
( died in 1181 ), is also the pivot of the alliance between the Bruce and the Stewarts who gave rise to the present pretenders of the Royal House of Scotland.
The three panels are self explanatory. There is an execution error in the de Chartley Arms, vairee or et gules, shown on panel 55 in so far as the design should begin with gold, not red. The differences in the Crowns, distinguishing between a baronial, earldom or royal rank, should also be noted.
The heraldic roses are a fundamental symbolism pointing to the Templar associations and affiliations of the Houses represented and their sympathies for the Stewart Dynasty. This does not have to detract from present loyalties to the Windsor Monarchy, which should in justice do something about a Stewart-restauration in Scotland and Ireland.Since my book is about the Clan I call “gensferreria......... ” of which the Ferrers are illustrious and important Members, I would like to say something about the Clan, the Ferrers and to point out, in particular, paradigmatically, the injustices, abuses and persecutions which this House had to suffer from the Plantagenet and Tudor Dynasties, in spite of both Dynasties being of Desposyniic descent and the Ferrers becoming related to them in addition to also being originally Desposyniic through mesopotamic links.
At page 2 of this Article I have mentioned Sir Robert Ferrers, the eigth and last Earl of Derby who lost all the Ferrers’ resources belonging to the male side of their ancestry with the exception of those inherited from the marriages to the Peverell, the Chester and the de Quincy heiress or co-heiress.
These resources were confiscated by the Crown with the blessings of Parliament at a stage when the latter had begun to be infiltrated by the new nobility of pen and law, like the Dugdales ( i.e., Sir William Dugdale of “ Antiquities of Warwickshire’s ” fame ) and given to the Lancaster Branch of the Royal House. The Title of Earl of Derby went to the Stanley. This at a time when Parliament began to play the Monarchy against the Barons and vice-versa, in a similar way the Papacy had done with the Monarchies and the Emperors. These games are very dangerous and damaging ones to play and can result, in spite of an apparent paltry and temporary improvement to the new players’ status and resources, in the serious and permanent damage to the governing structures and the general character and fabric of anation’s society that can become visible later on in history. An extreme example of such damage is evidenced by the genetic one resulting to French society from the murderous excesses of the French Revolution in 1789. The Westminster System of opposing parties debating in Parliament must never be abused by fanatical partisans’ enmities and the system must be seen as a tool of government not as an arena for mutual destruction. Love of Civilisation and nation must always be paramount in the order given. The Plantagenets ended badly and were replaced by other Dynasties, even worse than they had been . It is possible to show, in a way that English Historians have failed or have been unwilling to do, that the Policy of the conquering Norman Dynasty in relation to neighbouring Scotland had initially been one of recognition, toleration and respect of the then ruling British Monarchs of Scotland and Ireland, provided these reciprocated the same attitudes. This criterion of non-aggression, if mutually respected, in the absence of the many interfering forces, would have been a minimum requirement for a Dysposyniic balance. The de Quency are notorious for their services as facilitators of the friendship between the two Nations as well as the inter-marriages between English and Scottish families and the favours the Scottish Monarchs granted Anglo/Norman nobles, the Bruces having originally been, in fact, an Anglo/Norman house. The first to break the mutual understanding was King Henry II, the Plantagenet from Anjou, of Visigothic descent, who, having obtained the English Crown by marrying Eleanora d’Aquitaine, a Norman, the daughter of King Henry I, embarked in wars against his neighbours for the purpose of dominance and conquest. Eleanor d’Aquitaine, who had been during her father’s reign the ruler of Aquitaine, showing great wisdom and ability, opposed in fact, together with her sons, her greedy and power-crazy husband twice, first when Henry refused to return the Scottish territories of Northumberland and Cumberland to William The Lion ( 1165-1214 ), the second time, when Henry asked to divorce her, bent on marrying Alice the daughter of the King of France who had been living at the English Court, as the betrothed of Richard, one of the King’s son, aiming at the conquest of France as a step towards the the throne of the Holy Roman Emperor. Much has been said about Henry’s reforms of the Judicial System of his times ( even in a recent BBC Documentary by an historian and archaelogist called Anderson ) and the enpowerment and marvels of Common Law. However, England is the only western Nation that has not yet achieved a Constitution, thus leaving all Law in a state of flux. Moreover, Henry’s own character and way of living showed he was without scruples, morality or good intentions, a dissembler of truth. His real aim was to increase Royal Power by increasing the authority and jurisdiction of Common Law and of his appointed Judges by creating a new Nobility of Pen and Law, the arm-chair fighters, wrongly believing he could always control and dictate to them, since he alone had the power to choose and elect his clerks and judges, at the expense of existing cheks provided by the Church and the Nobility of the Sword, which is the true Nobility, insofaras it is the only real people prepared to fight injustice consistently for honour and justice. Eventually these new creations eroded even the authority and the power of the Monarch destroying the old nobility, opening the way, after the French Revolution and the rise of the Era of the so called Enlightenment, to a distorted Democracy stressing Freedom rather than Duty and Justice. Notice in fact how the USA have not got the statue of Justice ( which has a higher and more inclusive status than Liberty ) but that of Liberty on both New York’s Harbour and at the top of the Capitol. A serious error of moral evaluation with dire consequences to-day as Liberty has allowed the rise to power, infiltrations and take-overs of wealthy Mafiosi and the general decadence and corruption of the West!
The strength of character of the old nobility in England was amply
demonstrated by characters such as Sir Geffrey de Magnaville who fought King Stephen, Sir Geoffrey de Mandeville, who together with Sir Roger de Quency opposed King John, Robert Ferrers the fourth Earl of Derby, who fought King Henry II for 16 years, William Ferrers the sixth Earl of Derby who diplomatically opposed during his long life Kings, from John to Henry III, Simon de Montfort and Robert Ferrers the eigth and last Earl of Derby wo fought King Henry III and Edward I with tragic results.
To-day ( 2009) the danger is the Judiciary System gets infiltrated by Mafiosi elements as it has happened in Italy and elsewhere, and there is then no other power to reform the whole judiciary structure. Civil War becomes the only solution, like was the case in Franco’s Spain in 1938, but a Civil War-leader does not happen everyday, especially in the yellow-bellied, brainwashed societies the West is breeding to-day with modern advertising. Republics, in a worse situation than Monarchies, show everywhere the weackness of an abused Democratic System of Governmment. By default, a stalemate is reached in which corruption rules and nothing is done.
Again, the Common Law is only as good as the people of a Nation are. With the present abuses of Democracy, and the corruption of the Mafiosi leaders and of the Middle Classes, the Law suffers from being biased in favour of the moneyed individuals and is too expensive for the average citizen. Even when the scenario were to be uncorrupted, what may appear to be acceptable and normal to-day may not have been so in Henry’s times, when justice depended much on the activities of some good powerful Nobles or Institutions who had the power to oppose a corrupt Monarchy. The Military Monastic Order of the Templars was such a Power in the Europe of the Middle Ages. An example of this to-day would be the United Nations. However, in this there is too much collusion against the West by Islam, India and China with Third World Nations. What the world needs to-day, is a strong, Christian, healthy European Union, with a strong balance of checks, between a Parliament, a Senate and a Monarchich Assembly or something similar, and of course, a strong, flexible, open-ended Constitution to protect the endurance of the system and to prevent infiltrations and its being taken over by foreign elements, factors, forces and powers.
The members of the Monarchich Assembly would, like the Royal Monarchs of Islam ( i.e., Saudi Arabia ) only marry members from within its own ranks or from families recognised as being the descendents of old European Noble Houses, not for racial motivations, but in order to avoid the infiltration from incompatible foreign cultural elements aiming at unreciprocated take-overs. Try and find out how many barriers there would be to infiltrate the Saudi Arabian Monarchy.
In any case, the fact remains that, in spite of all evidence that Henry improved the administration of the law, he was an absolute Monarch that did not hesitate to use evil ways to attain his aims, as the case of the murder of Saint Thomas a’Becket shows and his exhorbitant ruinous, ruthless taxation that alienated all the people subjected to his rule in the Angevin Empire. As stated already, I am not an enemy of the Church of Rome, which is an institution worth saving, except that I believe Constantinianism is now redundant and obsoleted, as it has been infiltrated the world over by criminal forces, and is supported by Mafiosi bent on controlling the Roman Church which must get rid of them, since they represent, in spite of their chamaleontic camouflages, adaptations and charitable/humane impersonations, in Europe and in the West in general, traditional, political, foreign, destructive inplants and infiltrations, inimical to the West. Let us never forget that the beginnings of the Mafia in Sicily and Calabria were Saracenic ( islamic) fifth columns left behind by the Moslems withdrawing from these areas when the Germans and the Normans defeated them. There might have been a feigned conversion to Christianity, but this has been only skin deep. My ancestors went to Sicily to civilise the land but no one ever succeeded. My Branch left Sicily in 1800, except for a few of us who became hopelessly and inextricably mixed with the local riff-raff. Even Ferreri, Ferrari, Ferrero, etc., to-day in Australia and America have lost the traditions and knowlege of our noble past as “ gensferreria/ferraria ”. King Henry II’s feud against Saint Thomas may appear to have been justified by unrealistic priviledges safeguarded by the then too powerful and wealthy Constantinian Church, however balanced by the power of the Templars until 1300, bordering on injustice, protecting criminal prelates among the Clergy, however, let us also recognise the fact that the Clergy is subjected to by far greater temptations and forces of evil than the average person and should perhaps be judged by their own peers, however this cojncession should not have meant negligence and an abuse of justice. Henry’s aim was to decrease the Church’s power seeking the increase of Royal Power. This was shown in the reign of King Henry VIII when the humiliation of Rome was to serve his lust and attempts at siring a male issue from a succession of marriages, a vane one, owing to the fact that his reproductive system had been damaged by STDs ( syphilis ) acquired in his dissolute youth. The fact that his wife and his sons opposed him most of the time does also not go in his favour. His times were those in which the Nobility was asking for unfettered balancing judicial checks, both against the encroachment of the Church and of the King. Magna Charta and the Provisions of Oxford and Westminster were to be achieved only in the times of King Edward I
( 1272-1307 ), after the rebellion of Simon de Montfort, the Earl of Leicester to which Sir Robert Ferrers participated (1241-1279 ).
A new Religious movement had actually risen in Italy, that of the Franciscans, clamoring for justice and the protection of the poor, and was replacing the persecuted Order of Templars. Simon de Montfort was a Third Order ( lay) Franciscan. These were the times when the whole of Christendom was debating the issue of Church and religious poverty.
The struggle for Magna Charta backed by the Order of Templars, had begun in the times of Sir Robert Ferrers ( died 1173 ), Lord Tutburie, the third Earl of Derby, who rebelled against King Henry I, in a rebellion that lasted for 16 years, in support of Queen Eleanor and her sons aiming at curbing Henry’s obsessions with further imperial expansion that was causing increasing property in the Angevin Empire. How could a Knight, a Baron or an Earl find the surplus capital required to stimulate the economy of his estates and the welfare of his subjects as well to finance the costs of an unending War for Empire, with the new nobility of arm-chairs nobles, the itinerant Royal judges and their pen-pushers breathing down their necks and lusting for a share of their wealth?
The sixth Earl of Derby, Sir William Ferrers( died 1247 ), perhaps the most brilliant among the eight in relation to the difficulties in which he was forced to ac by his times, also opposed absolute monarchich power, in support of Magna Charta, however using diplomacy rather than violence and brute force. He lived though at the times when the Order of Templars to which he participated was still being alert, effective, feared and respected by the Monarchs and the Church. Even so, all this opposition by the Barons to the centralisation of all powers in the Monarchy, had to be prolonged until the times when Simon de Montfort ( 1251-1266 ) was forced into a rebellion, against his wishes for peace and justice and his loyalty to the Crown, that almost wiped out the Plantagenets. The proof of what I am saying is in the fact that he fought his last Battles ( Lewis and Evesham ) while holding King Henry III a prisoner in his camp, instead of having had him executed as he should have.
See “ Simon de Montfort and His Cause ”, by Rev. W. H. Hutton, London, 1888, G. P. Putnam’s Sons, a little work that shows the honesty and good will of Simon the Earl of Leicester. On the other hand, L. F. Salzman’s
“ Edward I ”, although confirming the prolongation of the struggle for judiciary balances in the times of this King, fails to do justice to the cause of Sir Robert Ferrers whom he dismisses without any research of his motives and of his aims, not even mentioning de Montfort and the fact that Robert had joined the latter’s rebellion, being made a scapegoat, while de Clare and others had been pardoned.
I quote from page 45-:
Early in 1273, there had been a rising, anarchical and aimless, in the north; Robert de Ferrers, the restless Earl of Derby, had seized Chartley Castle in Staffordshire and had had to be brought to order by a force under Edmund of Lancaster [ to whom later on went all confiscated Ferrers resources ] and the Earl of Lincoln.
Unquote.
Dugdale, an extremely skilled, intelligent, antiquarian, lawyer and heraldist, of the newly created petty noblity, nevertheless still a yellow-bellied pen-pusher, unfit to be called an Historian, in his “Antiquities of Warwickshire ” also comments as one who blindly and servilely believes that every opposition to the Government ( the Monarchy ) isalways wrong. He was a King Herald of Arms, a very gifted man, but he belonged to the nobility of the pen, of lawyers, people who fought sitting in armchairs.
As a contrast, there is not one Battle of the English Middle Ages in which the Ferrers and their Peers, did not participate, including the famous, mythical ones of Agincourt, Crecy and Poitiers when the English fought the French outnumbered-: 1 Englishman against 10 Frenchmen.
Chartley was a Castle/Barony in Staffordshire, located in the Hundred of Pirehill, some three miles south-west of Loxley ( famous for Robin Hood’s birthplace ), in the Hundred of Totmonslow. According to Erdeswicke, Chartley had been part of the ancient patrimony of the Earls of Chester, acquired by these directly from the Crown soon after the redaction of Domesday Book. It had been acquired by Sir William Ferrers
( died 1247), the sixth Earl of Derby in the days of his marriage to Agness, the third daughter of Hugh de Kevelioc, the fifth Earl of Chester, sister and co-heiress of Ranulph de Blondeville, the sixth Earl of Chester, Duke of Brittany...............etc., who died without issue.
The Arms Vairee or et gules that had been inherited by the marriage of the third Earl of Derby ( died 1173 ) to Margaret, the daughter of William Peverell, the Baron of Nottingham, became associated with Chartley in the new Barony in Fee begun after the loss of the Earldom of Derby in 1266. Since de Chartley was a Ferrers’ possession sourced by their matriarchal lines, it had not been subjected to confiscation by the Crown and as a matter of fact it allowed John the son of Robert Ferrers, the last Earl of Derby, the disgraced rebel, the foundation for a request of a Chartered Barony of de Chartley to be approved together with a pardon, by both the Crown and Parliament, the date of obtainment of which is a matter of controversy as discussed in Vol.I of “Baronies In Fee ”, A Concentrated Account of all these so called Baronies compiled from BARONIA ANGLICA CONCENTRATA by Sir T. C. Banks Bart. N.S., RIPON.
It is most likely that Robert Ferrers was fighting to retrieve an ancient maternal inheritance to which the Ferrers’ Coat of Arms, Vairee’ or et gules were linked, something every noble in England would have respected and assented to, rather than seizing a new possession as the sycophant and ignoramus L. F. Salzman reports. It is important to realise that the Ferrers had already lost the use of their ancient, original Coat of Arms, the one born by the first Earl of Derby, born in ca. 1083, prior to the Chartley-one, which they had
inherited from the Peverells. The ancient Arms had in fat been placed in abeyance, following the rebellion by Robert the fourth Earl of Derby, when King Henry II had punished him with the loss of Tutbury Castle at the border between Staffordshire and Derbyshire, to which these Arms had been linked. Arms that are linked to an Honour or a Title are placed in abeyance when the Honour or Title is lost. Salszman should have known this when making judgmental comments about Robert Ferrers the eigth Earl, in his dismissive, condescending, superior ways.
Please remember that the first Robert’s crime had been to support Queen Eleanor and her sons as the loyal response to the Norman line, his right and duty toward the memory of his liege Lord William the Conqueror. Henry II, had he been a noble character should have understood and appreciated that loyalty to one’s ancient vows and oaths of fealty. Was that the Royal Justice inspired to the newly created Itinerant Royal Judges, so praised and sung by that nitwit, Anderson, of BBC-fame?
It is obvious to anyone considering the enormous power and resources held by the Ferrers as the Earls of Derby, that they could not remain neutral in the struggles between the Barons and the Monarchy.
It is also obvious to one who keeps on reading the History of this House with an open mind, seeking the path of Justice in history, that the Ferrers, whose Line eventually failed in the male issue and who were to be taken over by the Devereux, when Walter Devereux ( 1461-1485 ) became the 7th Baron Ferrers of Chartley through his marriage to Anne Ferrers born 1438, the only daughter of William Ferrers of Chartley
(1412-1450 ), still kept seeking justice rather than self-aggrandisement
when, in the person of Sir Robert Devereux-Ferrers (1591-1646 ), Knight, 12th Baron Ferrers of Chartley, Earl of Essex, Viscount Hereford, Baron Bourchier, financed, organised, trained and led Cromwell’s Roundheads in the days of the protestant “ Puritans ” fighting against the idea of the Rule by Divine Right of the Stewart Monarchs.
However even before these times, the Devereux-Ferrers showed their loyalty to the Crown, when this required a legitimate and just action, in spite of the persecutions and injustices the Crown had inflicted onto their House, thus showing thei purity and nobility of their character and action, when Sir Walter Devereux-Ferrers, Knight, the 7th Baron Ferrers of Chartley, died on 22bd August 1485 with three of his sons at the tragic battle of Bosworth, in support of the Plantagenet King
Richard III. Another famous member of this House, sir Robert Devereux-Ferrers ( 1568-1601 ), Knight, the 11th Baron Ferrers of Chartley, Earl of Essex, Viscount Hereford, Baron Bourchier, who had become a favourite of Queen Elisabeth I, was condemned to death on trumped up charges, beheaded and atteinted in 1600-1 by a corrupt Parliament, filled with the afore mentioned pen-pushers, Lawyers and servile Judjes.
His son, Sir Robert Devereux-Ferrers Knight, was eventually restored in blood and honours in 1604 since Queen Elisabeth died in 1603.
To conclude, let me make a short list of grievances the Ferrers have had against the English Monarchs which point to the possibility they were continuously being provoked by their jealousy about their successes, good-will, their power for good they never abused, using it only when some cause in the name of Justice required it of them, in accordance to conscience, duty and wealth as the Earls of Derby-:
(1) King Henry II (1154-1189 ) conveniently overlooked the fact that Robert the fourth Earl had cavalierly supported his wife Eleanor, who was of Norman descent, like the Ferrers who owed loyalty to the memory of the Conqueror, against Henry’s abuses. Henry should also have punished his wife and sons who had also rebelled, but did not. The walls of Tutburie Castle were reduced in height and the Ferrers lost the use of their ancestral Arms, which had become associated with the Honour of Tutbury, i.e., Argent, six horseshoes sable nailed or, arrayed 3, 2, 1. Duffield Castle was reduced to its foundations and remained so untill to-day.
(2) Agatha, Robert’s daughter was seduced by King John, abused as a mistress and Joane, John’s illegitimate daughter sent into exhile, married off to LLewelin the Prince of Wales who had fought against Robert and Eleanor, had captured Robert’s brother, Walchelinus, the Baron of Eggington, Joanne's uncle, and had hung him.
(3) Robert the eigth and last Earl of Derby had not participated in the Battle of Evesham ( some say he was forced to do so by Simon, against his will) that saw the defeat of Simon de Montfort, withdrawing from the cause of Simon after the Battle of Lewis ( 1263) together with de Clare who was of higher status than he was. Yet he was severely punished while de Clare and others were pardoned. His daughter Elisabeth was married off to the Welsh Prince as a way to exhile.
A short account of the debacle is supplied in “ A Survey of Staffordshire ” by Sampson Erdeswicke................together with “ The History and Antiquities of that County ”, by Reverend Thomas Hardwood, B.D.F.S.A, see pages 398-400.
The Latin petition sent by Robert to King Henry III is therein given. A short history of the strategically important Castle of Tutburie is also given therein.
(4) It is probable that had the Order of the Templars survived the French and Papal collusion, Sir Robert Ferrers would have retained the Earldom of Derby since there would not have been rebellions against the power-usurping and taxation-grasping Monarchy. However, even after their impoverishment and the reduction of the Ferrers' Power in Staffordshire where the bulk of their Manors had been
( 114 out of 210 ), they were suspected of hoarding Templar resources.
King Henry VIII, in his policy against Rome, confiscated Church-property which he distributed among his new nobility of pen-pushers, itinerant judges, and sycophants.He ordered Abbeys destroyed and their foundations dug-up, sent clergymen, nuns, monks and religious persons loyal to Rome to starve in the streets and the countryside.
This was the fate of Merevale Abbey, that had been founded as a Cistercian Abbey/Monastery by Robert Ferrers, the second Earl of Derby
( 1101-1163 ), who donated the extensive Forests of Arden to this
foundation. It was dug-up to below its foundations in search for treasure and is now Merevale Farm sporting on the rebuilt Gate House the Arms of the Dugdales, the sycophantic pen-pushers.
I was able to locate it because I had made a copy of an old Road Map in Australia from a Map in the Coburg’s Library. Present Maps do not bother to show it any longer. Yet there is there the original Gate- Church of Our Lady of Merevale, now inside the rebuilt Gate- House, and it contains four Ferrers-tombs/effigies, spanning from 1198 to 1450.
It is clear the National Trust should be actively involved but is not.
It appears as if, in spite of the pride, love and care of the Anglican lady Minister, these are condemned to slow decay and disappearance for lack of maintenance.
The most ancient of these structures is the Knight-effigy of Sir William Ferrers, Lord Ferrers, Lord Tutbury, the fifth Earl of Derby, who died in ca. 1197, a crusading Knight, in the siege of Acre in Palestine, during the Third Crusade, led by King Richard I, the Lion-Heart.
His effigy is coeval with and made by the same artist who made the one in the Church of the Templars, at Temple Court in London near the Thames River, for Sir Geoffrey de Mandeville the second Earl of Essex, one of the leaders with Sir R oger de Quincy ( died 1264 ) in the struggle for Magna Charta and the Provisions of Oxford and Westminster.
Sir Geoffrey de Mandeville had also participated in the third Crusade with Sir William Ferrers but had survived and returned to England.
Incidentally, the Ferrers’s effigy has been wrongly identified in the past by so called experts, as belonging to Sir William Ferrers (1200-1254),
the seventh Earl of Derby, and I have been able to rectify the error, after my visit to Merevale Church in 2004, upon my return to Australia when becoming by chance confronted with Sir Geoffrey’s effigy from a drawing by Stothard the Scottish Archaeological Draughtsman, who wrongly assigned it to Sir Geffrey de Magnaville an anscestor of de Mandeville living in tempore King Stephen.
I hope my efforts shall be graciously recognised.
The Triptich consists of three heraldic panels sequentially numbered 53, 54 and 55 in a Commemorative Collection numbering 61, on the ceiling-corniches of the State Withdrawing Room and the Breackfast Parlour, on the first floor at Tamworth Castle in Staffordshire. These rooms have a fireplace each, back to back through a shared wall. There are a total of sixty one heraldic panels similarly painted, in these rooms, all quartered per pale to commemorate marriages by and to the House of Ferrers, with a few exceptions, a few being individual Arms, the one about Sir George Vere-Ferrers-Townshend, either the 16th or 17th Baron Ferrers de Chartley, Knight of Tamworth Castle, Baron Compton, Marquess of Townshend of Raynham, Earl of Leicester, being multi-quartered, displaying 28 Arms.
Most Arms are in the State Withdrawing Room as this is the larger of the two, the Tryptich being on the ceiling-corniche direcly above the fireplace, however, although being the smaller room, the Breackfast Parlour displays right onto the fireplace a magnificently carved oack-panel showing a COA of 12 quarterings, complete with Crest, Supporting Animals, Motto, War Cry and Mantling, at the centre of a corniche of symbols and mythical characters, favourite fruits, animals, some of which have esoteric links to Templar and Illuminati-thought and beliefs.
I discovered this to be the COA of Sir Robert ( Sewallis or Seswalo...the ancient pre-conquest surname of the Shirley ) Shirley-Ferrers 1692-1714,
( died sine prole ) Viscount Tamworth 1711 , son of Anne Ferrers heiress of Sir Humphrey Ferrers, who died in 1678, who married Robert Shirley, who died in 1698.
The series was commissioned in the times of the Hannoverian Dynasty (1714-1901 ), following the fall of the Stuart Dynasty ( 1603-1714 ), as panel 54 appears to refer to the reign of King James II ( 1685-1689 ), just before whose reign, John Ferrers, the last Ferrers Knight of Tamworth had died, in 1680. His daughter Anne had then inherited the Honour of the Knighthood of Tamworth Castle which was passed on to the son of her marriage to Robert Shirley Esq., who died in 1698, yes, her son Robert of the same name as the father, (1692-1714 ) who styled himself Viscount Tamworth in 1711.
Robert Shirley died without issue, and all Ferrers’ resources assembled in turn in the hands of the Shirley, the Compton, the Townshend, the Ferrers of Baddesley-Clinton being unable to accede to these probably owing to their lack of adequate rank, in spite of the marriage of Edward Ferrers of Baddesley-Clinton to the Ferrers-Townshend-heiress, Lady Harriet Ann Townshend, who died in 1813.
Owing to the presence in the series of the already mentioned, multi-quartered Coat of Arms of a Sir George Vere-Ferrers-Townshend, Marquess of Townshend,
either the 16th (1755-1811 ) or the 17th Baron Ferrers de Chartley ( 1788-1855), both of the same name, and with the same Titles and Honours, it is quite possible one of these two gentlemen may have been the one to have either commissioned or at least to have had the works completed.
There are a few errors, either pertaining to heraldic representation or of an historical nature in the Arms of the collection.
Although the principal aim----------there being several goals aimed at in the collection of heraldic nuptial Coat of Arms, all discussed in my book------appears to be to summarise and commemorate the most influential alliances with other noble Houses, since the beginning of the House of Ferrers at the landing at Hastings from Normandie, then known in the Latin used in those times all over Europe for legal purposes, as de Ferrariis, the Triptich holds a central position in the Nuptial Collection and focuses on the Britishness of the Ferrers by its summary of the links of this House with the Scottish Crown and its British traditions and aspirations, about which Sir Laurence Gardner ( of St.Clair, the traditional hereditary guardian of Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland ) writes so well and extensively in his books about the Holy Graal and the sacred Desposyniic Dynasties. Gardner fails however to ask vital questions about the failures of the Desposyniic ( Davidic ) Lines, thus also failing to seek suitable answers and to synthetise this knowledge for our times, a task I am trying to accomplish.
The three panels of the Triptich are in fact floating in a badckground of five-petal Rosae Rugosae or Templar Roses, pink and silver, which symbolise par excellence the Holy Graal tradition of the British Monarchy .
Let me quote from page 286 of Sir Laurence Gardner’s “ The Bloodline of the Grail Kings ”-:
On 26th March 1371 the Royal House of 6th century Arthur [ b. 599- d. 603 ] mac Aedan of Dalraida, the key Graal successions of Britain and Europe had conjoined in Scots Royalty, and the Stewarts’ ancient legacy of kinship was fulfilled.
Unquote.
Another Article in my book shows the links of the House of Ferrers to the Order of the Knights Templar since its origins, their contributions to and participations in the affairs of the Order, founded by Sir Godfrey de Bouillon, under the instigation and inspiration of Saint Bernard de Clairveaux, the reformer of the Cistercian ( Cluniac ) Monastic Order along stricter Benedectine Rules, until the loss of the Earldom of Derby at the time of the eighth and last Earl, Sir Robert Ferrers ( 1241-1279 ).
I shall come back in this Article, to this stage of Ferrers’ history, which has been much maligned and misrepresented by most historians slavishly protecting the reputation of the English Royal Dynasties of the Plantagenets and of the Tudors, among whom there were some really abominable and diabolical Kings, worthy of the worst and sinister side of their ancient barbaric anscestors. Being of the blood of Jesus has not been, does not necessarily mean a guarantee of sanctity as God’s Will, Grace and the assent to God’s Grace by the individual are required.
Both King David and Sholomon were corrupt, King Arthur was incestuous with his sister and we all know about King Henry VIII of the Tudor Dynasty.
Being related to Jesus can mean however a natural ( inherited ) predisposition to and openness to Grace.
Origins in accordance to blood and flesh/ancestry do not really count unless ideals of the spirit are also embraced and made visible into one’s praxis. Please remember Galatians 3:28.
Digression.
In a short but necessary digression, it is important to note that all modern democratic ideals of personal liberties, freedoms and priviledges, unless complemented by their corresponding duties are but shallow and hollow, aimed by abusers at justifying the liberties of corrupt leaders and rulers, including present Mafiosi ( i.e., anti-society, anti-civilisation, anti-State ), Repubblican Governments ( a typical example being Italy to-day, in 2009). These abusers of Modern Democracy claim in fact to be democratic while abusing and corrupting the ideals of freedom by separating these from their corresponding complementary duties, and by neglecting a suitable and satisfactory education of the people, alienating these from their histories, noble traditions and heroic, sometimes saintly, referential witnesses, thus giving rise to generations of Pinocchio-like individuals, who have lost most of the knowledge of their national and even personal identities/histories/ glories/honours, becoming open to the evil, shallow manipulations of their soulless, mercenary leaders who fill these with hollow heroes taken from ball games, sports, the stages etc., a repetition in a different, bloodless form, of the Gladatorial Games of corrupt Imperial Rome.
All Modern Democratic ideals had their origins in the Golden Age of Greece which reached its peak at the times of the ostracised, exhiled, persecuted oligarch Pericles, the last of the true, noble Greeks, and were championed and implemented in Medieval Europe, before the rise of the corrupt National Monarchies, by the Templar Movement which has its roots in the times of King Zedekiah
( 597-587 ) of Judah, martired by his Assyrian captors, whose daughter TAMAR was brought to Ireland by either the Prophet Ezekiel or Jeremiah together with the Royal Guards of the Temple of Jerusalem or Sion ( the anscestors of the Templars) and married in ca. 586 BC, to EOCHAID I, the King of the Irish, giving rise to the ‘Stone Royal Dynasty’ reaching down to UGAINE MAR THE GREAT of Ireland in the 4th century BC and from the latter down to the ‘Royal Scots and Welsh Dynasties’ of ARTHUR OF DALRIADA and ARTHUR OF DYFED in the 9th century AD.
One must also mention at this stage, the other judaeo/christian alliances through Jesus and Mary Magdalene, James of Arimathea and other intermarriages between Celtic, Gothic and Shythian Princes during their migrations from the Caspian Sea to Northern Europe and its islands, begun in ca. 6000 BC and even earlier prehistoric mediterranean semitic ones to the prehistoric anscestors of Cro-Magnon origins of the mentioned Celtic/Gothic/Shythian groups, which occurred in ca. 30,000, prior to the Last Glacial Maximum ( L.G.M.) that occurred between 25,000 and 13,000 BC.
There is also a publication from The Covenanmt Publishing Co. Ltd., London, “ The Royal House of Britain an Enduring Dynasty ” by Rev. W. M. H. Milner......which gives at page 21 a genealogical list not much differing from the one supplied by Sir Laurence Gardner. We are not here concerned swith exact details but must be contented with the fact the agreement about this pre-historical data is close enough.
In the former document Tamar is rendered Tea Tephi of Tara and the prophet Ezekiel ( some say it was Jeremiah...............The fact is a Hebrew prophet was involved who was in charge of the Guards of the Temple of Jerusalem in the times of King Zedekiah of Judah. ) was by the Irish called Olam Folla. According to the ancient Epics, Tamar married, sometime after her father’s death in 587 B.C., a Milesian ( from Miletus/Greece ) Prince of Celtic origins with ancient origins origins in the area around the Caspian Sea in 6000-4000 B.C., whom she met in Spain during their migrations to Ireland where they soon landed founding a
Dynasty that gave rise to the Royal Irish and Scottish Houses, through which the existing Stewart ( Stuart ) line as well as those of all Desposyniic European Monarchies can be traced.
One must also mention at this stage the other judaeo/christian alliances through Jesus and Mary Magdalene, James of Arimathea and other intermarriages between Celtic, Gothic, and Scythian Princes during their migrations from the Caspian and Black Seas to Europe and its remote northern islands which began in ca. 6000 B.C.. One must not forget even earlier pre-pre-historic migrations by mediterranean semitic people of the ‘E’, ‘I’ ,’J’, ‘K’, etc. Y-DNA Blood Haplogroups, who mixed with the Cro-Magnon anscestors of the mentioned Celtic/Gothic/Scythian groups, of the ‘R’ group which occurred in ca. 30,000 B.C., prior to the last Glacial Maimum ( L.G.M.) that occurred between 25,000 and 13,000 B.C.
Constantinianism, which marked during the early centuries of the first millennium A.D., the divergence of Roman Catholicism from the Israelitic brand of Christianiyt of Jesus’ followers, although motivated in the times following Emperor Constantine’s death, ( who was incidentally a Desposynic Ruler through st.Helena, his saintly mother’s anscestry ), by then plausible historical and political reasons, has attempted during the first centuries of the Roman Christian Church to erase or somehow manipulate all these memories and origins and give Western History an exclusively Latin/Hebrew-dressing. However to-day, when this dressing has become alienated and corrupted by the rise to power on the waves of a corrupted and abused Democracy, of the moneyed, collusive, scheming, sinister, goat-herders and shepperds, ex-slaves brought into Europe by the naive Romans, or later Barbarian Invaders, who are also religious hypocrits, to-day has the time come to bring these memories and traditions back, to purge Constantinianism from its Mafia accretions, affiliations and infiltrations, to reform, revive Christianity, and save Western Civilisation and its democratic achievements, by looking back to the original Templar understandings about a healthy and godly government. It is important to remember that the Scottish King Robert The Bruce ( 1306-1329 ) gave sanctuary in Scotland to the Members of the Order of the Templars which is still active there in hiding, its ideals also being still alive to-day.
The Stuart Dynasty ( 1603-1714 ) tried to spread these ideals for the benefit of Europe, however England was then bent onto becoming a World Empire, a process begun under the Tudors and the religious wars among christian hypocrits and fanatics of various denominations, who made a mockery of Democratic Ideals, destroyed their well-intentioned attempts. The English Empire is now no more and the Tudors fizzed out in a couple of generations, killed by STDs contracted by King Henry VIII, paradoxically also a Desposyniic Royal. England ( I do not say Britain ), although still in better moral shape than Italy, France, the Balcans and the USA, etc. is fast degenerating too under Anglo-Saxon laissais-fairism which is not Democracy but its corrupted form.
. We all realise now in the Era I qualify as “of Manure ”, the catastrophic events the Western World and the whole world have had to endure since the French Revolution and the Era of Enlightenment, without any real or permanent political progress, including the rise of Neo-Islamism, global demographic expansion and a great wastage of resources that are threatening to obliterate Western achievements.
With the rise of a United Europe a possibility has now eventuated for another attempt at returning Law and Order to governing bodies infiltrated by moneyed power groups ( vulgarly called Mafie) who are so mercenary, selfish and stupid, as to not be able to realise the number of further catastrophic events looming at the horizon of their self-deluding ways. The Mafie have ruined the USA, are sabotaging Europe, and even Australia, a Continent the Cities of which can show such a transparency due to their open and clean areas and suburbs that organised crime should not be able to exist, is fighting a loosing war against Organised Crime since, even the High Police Force Commissioner has admitted the goal is now to just maintain existing Crime manageable. We are referring here principally to the drugs’ traffic that is damaging our young generations for which so much money is being invested when adolescents, a great deal of which is being wasted due to the damage caused by substance-abuse and a lack of identity. The inability to effectively hit Crime is the result of Democratic Laws that insist in dealing with it with an excessive amount of safeguards protecting the Criminal. Drug-users should also be prosecuted and punished. Gentlemen are required at all governmental levels, not just a couple of them as puppets at the top, members of the ancient noble Houses. In order to get these gentlemen to leading positions, the restauration of all Desposyniic Monarchs is required, joined into Monarchich Assemblies, with elected Monarchich leaders, ranked in accordance to their educational achievements and experiences, according to merit, working together to balance and check Parliaments, Senates, Congresses, all governmental levels, through series of Permanent Royal Commissions, in relation to issues of corruption, selfishness, delusionary fraudolent practices ( including bubbles of all sorts and descriptions ), monopolies, in relation to all moneyed powers in the Western Nations. These Monarchich Assemblies would also ensure the protection, survival and perpetuation of our Western Cultures, Traditions, Languages, Values/Ideals, Religious Beliefs and Liberties from the infiltrations, encroachments and take-overs of foreign, alien, opponents, mostly masquerading as Immigrants or lovers of Democracy.
The West should remain open to adoption of Immigrants but these Immigrants should be West-Lovers, else they should remain where they came from, not emigrate just for the sake of acquiring political rights and to benefit from higher standards of living and being. These people, if serious, should remain in their own Countries and actively fight their corrupt leaders if needs be through armed
Revolutions.
There is no room for loafers and fake pacifists in our World. There has never ben a place for these fakes and yellow bellies, unless they are prepared to renounce the world like some ancient catholic, buddhist or islamic saints did.
These Immigrants must either fight their Revolutions at home or be prepared to fight in our armies.
End of Digression.
The Triptich is a Templar legacy for the Ferrers who are members of “gensferreria/ferraria/farrar ”. The reason for my spending so much time and effort in researching the Ferrers is therefore in the fact that they are Desposyniic, have these strong Templar links, which have also existed in other European families of “gensferreria ” as exemplified by the Arms of the Ferrari of Genova, have behaved extremely well when compared to noble families from the Middle Ages, surviving by the Grace of God until our present times, having given rise to this Clan which is unique in the History of Europe, and can be used as an example of Desposyniic excellence, in spite of the general failure of Desposyniic Monarchies. This legacy, this tradition, being of a spiritual rather than a material nature, can serve as an archetype for all those in the West who have descended from Celts, Goths and Scythian tribes who as the “gensferreria....... ” migrated to Europe from the Middle East prior to the establishment of the civilised borders of the Roman Empire. The Triptich is about all these issues I have written above, once one has taken the step and made the effort to know the History it has been associated with, this history having been interpreted correctly in the spirit of Galatians 3:28 sith which I try to permeate my historical, theological, phylosophical, escatological, etc. world-view.
The abridged Genealogical Charts preceding this Article have been supplied to provide some of the landmarks required for this understanding of the imperfect/flawed human resources and their progress in experience, evolution, distance and time and of the European scenario, which gave rise to the Templar movement from its Biblical origins in the times of King Zedekiah ( 597-587 B.C.), of the Prophet Ezekiel/Jeremiah, the Temple of Jerusalem and its Body of Guards of Syon.
The Triptich begs the honest and enlightened reader to ask and to consider the question why did all these somehow well-intentioned Nobles and Monarchs,
related to the Davidic Lion of Judah, to the Royal House of Israel FAIL?
The House of Ferrers at least, which is a member ot the Clan of “gensferreria/ferraria/shirleia/farria” as well as of the wider Desposyniic Davidic Circle, has always been extremely well intentioned and behaved better than most, when contrasted to various Dynastic and noble Houses, all fallen along the way.
It still has to-day, representatives at the House of Lords as the Earl Ferrers.The explanation asked above about the reasons for all this failure, a question which is not asked or answered by Sir Laurence Gardner ( who as a claimant to the title of Knight St. Clair should know better than anyone else ) and the present descendants of the ancient Desposynic Monarchies, still bent on and bound to try and repeat the errors of the Past, if allowed to do so, is the spirit of all-exclusive pride, greed and murderous competition that animated all these Desposynic Monarchs, as well as their predecessors, since the Fall of the Roman Empire of the West in ca. 450 A.D., who tried to eliminate one another in continuous fratricidal wars, including and up to WW I, falsely motivated to unending wars against the ideal of a Christian European Unity, under the mutually balanced supervision of the Sacred Roman Empire and of a truly spiritual Christian Church.
One must consider at this stage that the beginning of the fratricidal rot in the West was the usurpation by the Carolingian Dynasty, under the
encouragement of the Roman Church ot those times, of the rights of the Merovingian Dynasty, issuing from the ancient Line of the Fishers Kings that was from King Clovis the Merovingian, who had become King ofthe Salian Franks in 481 A.D. with the blessings of both the western and the eastern Roman Emperors. This usurpation began anew a chain of treacheries that reflected those of the Roman Empire when oaths had ceased to have sacred importance in western culture.
Western man must be retaught the sacredness of oath-taking and a
return should be seeked to the most possible pristine oaths taken at the end of the Western Roman Empire.
The interferences of the Constantinian Church in Rome aimed to generate an Imperial hyerarchy totally dependent from and submissive to the Roman Church and tried to achieve this aim by manipulations and exclusions of scriptural texts ( at the council of Nicea and later ones ), by the total Judaization/Latinisation of the biblical sources, by reducing the importance of all mesopotamian cultural and ethnic contributions, the removal of Desposyniic mandates and missions from the nordic Royal Lines that had intemarried with the Davidic descendants, etc.. As a contrast one can see in the Empire of Byzathium the opposite scenario, one in which the Church was obedient to the Emperors, not without struggles or violence though. So one observes the struggles between Church and State for dominance in Europe, and the evil rise of competing
Monarchies in Europe encouraging and stressing un-Christian, nationalistic divisons with the Roman Church’s blessings. Sir Laurence Gardner speacks well in his works of these manipulations, in spite of his inability to synthetise what he knows for our times. A typical example is the incorporation by the Jews in the Pentateuch, of the racial Noetic story of God’s rejection of the blacks, when we all know that Moses
himself, Joseph of Egypt, Aaron, Akhenaten, Nephertitis etc. had marked dark skins and ethiopic features. So Michelangelo ended painting God as a white patriarch on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and the Hebrew Scholars still debate whether Adam was of the white race and God Itself white.
This is why “gensferreria/ferraria/farria” is such a unique phenomenon in Europe and in the world, since the members of this Clan, unconsciously retained in their surnames, by remaining at least true to their surnames-: i.e., in the Latin irregular verb fero-tuli-latum-ferre................the evidence of their common ancestral roots. This amidst the chaos and disorder of European history, like the struggles between Welfs and Ghibellines and those caused by the religious wars, just to name a couple of issues that caused divisions, enmities and dissents.
I am not against Roman Catholicism and Democracy which I wish to synthetically retain as one of the major western forces, but pointing to a need for reformation and truth.
This is why I am suggesting to-day a restauration of all existing surviving Monarchs to the ancient European seats of Monarchich Government, under democratically controlled conditions and safeguards, afforded by modern Media and Communications, benefiting from the new realisations and understandings afforded by our present knowledge of History, interpreted according to the lines pointed out here in this Article.
These Monarchs should have advisory and legislative powers in parallel with Parliaments, Congresses, Senates, etc. and would provide a guarantee of thre perpetuation and safeguarding of our cultural tradition and heritage from opponents and infiltrators, due to the fact they would only be allowed to inter-marry within their European, christian, historical circles, in the same way Islamic Monarchs, see Saudi Arabia, have been doing and are doing even to-day.
Panel 55 of the Triptich shows the marriage alliance, his second marriage, between Sir William Ferrers, the seventh Earl of Derby, wrongly designated in the Panel as the 2nd Earl, to Margaret de Quincy, the eldest daughter and co-heiress from the marriage of Roger de Quincy, the Earl of Winchester, to Helen, daughter of Lord Alain of Galloway and Margaret of Anguss & Huntingdon.
The House of Anguss & Huntingdon, being related to David the King of Scots (1124-1153), and to Hugh II ( Keveliok ) the fifth Earl of Chester,
( died in 1181 ), is also the pivot of the alliance between the Bruce and the Stewarts who gave rise to the present pretenders of the Royal House of Scotland.
The three panels are self explanatory. There is an execution error in the de Chartley Arms, vairee or et gules, shown on panel 55 in so far as the design should begin with gold, not red. The differences in the Crowns, distinguishing between a baronial, earldom or royal rank, should also be noted.
The heraldic roses are a fundamental symbolism pointing to the Templar associations and affiliations of the Houses represented and their sympathies for the Stewart Dynasty. This does not have to detract from present loyalties to the Windsor Monarchy, which should in justice do something about a Stewart-restauration in Scotland and Ireland.Since my book is about the Clan I call “gensferreria......... ” of which the Ferrers are illustrious and important Members, I would like to say something about the Clan, the Ferrers and to point out, in particular, paradigmatically, the injustices, abuses and persecutions which this House had to suffer from the Plantagenet and Tudor Dynasties, in spite of both Dynasties being of Desposyniic descent and the Ferrers becoming related to them in addition to also being originally Desposyniic through mesopotamic links.
At page 2 of this Article I have mentioned Sir Robert Ferrers, the eigth and last Earl of Derby who lost all the Ferrers’ resources belonging to the male side of their ancestry with the exception of those inherited from the marriages to the Peverell, the Chester and the de Quincy heiress or co-heiress.
These resources were confiscated by the Crown with the blessings of Parliament at a stage when the latter had begun to be infiltrated by the new nobility of pen and law, like the Dugdales ( i.e., Sir William Dugdale of “ Antiquities of Warwickshire’s ” fame ) and given to the Lancaster Branch of the Royal House. The Title of Earl of Derby went to the Stanley. This at a time when Parliament began to play the Monarchy against the Barons and vice-versa, in a similar way the Papacy had done with the Monarchies and the Emperors. These games are very dangerous and damaging ones to play and can result, in spite of an apparent paltry and temporary improvement to the new players’ status and resources, in the serious and permanent damage to the governing structures and the general character and fabric of anation’s society that can become visible later on in history. An extreme example of such damage is evidenced by the genetic one resulting to French society from the murderous excesses of the French Revolution in 1789. The Westminster System of opposing parties debating in Parliament must never be abused by fanatical partisans’ enmities and the system must be seen as a tool of government not as an arena for mutual destruction. Love of Civilisation and nation must always be paramount in the order given. The Plantagenets ended badly and were replaced by other Dynasties, even worse than they had been . It is possible to show, in a way that English Historians have failed or have been unwilling to do, that the Policy of the conquering Norman Dynasty in relation to neighbouring Scotland had initially been one of recognition, toleration and respect of the then ruling British Monarchs of Scotland and Ireland, provided these reciprocated the same attitudes. This criterion of non-aggression, if mutually respected, in the absence of the many interfering forces, would have been a minimum requirement for a Dysposyniic balance. The de Quency are notorious for their services as facilitators of the friendship between the two Nations as well as the inter-marriages between English and Scottish families and the favours the Scottish Monarchs granted Anglo/Norman nobles, the Bruces having originally been, in fact, an Anglo/Norman house. The first to break the mutual understanding was King Henry II, the Plantagenet from Anjou, of Visigothic descent, who, having obtained the English Crown by marrying Eleanora d’Aquitaine, a Norman, the daughter of King Henry I, embarked in wars against his neighbours for the purpose of dominance and conquest. Eleanor d’Aquitaine, who had been during her father’s reign the ruler of Aquitaine, showing great wisdom and ability, opposed in fact, together with her sons, her greedy and power-crazy husband twice, first when Henry refused to return the Scottish territories of Northumberland and Cumberland to William The Lion ( 1165-1214 ), the second time, when Henry asked to divorce her, bent on marrying Alice the daughter of the King of France who had been living at the English Court, as the betrothed of Richard, one of the King’s son, aiming at the conquest of France as a step towards the the throne of the Holy Roman Emperor. Much has been said about Henry’s reforms of the Judicial System of his times ( even in a recent BBC Documentary by an historian and archaelogist called Anderson ) and the enpowerment and marvels of Common Law. However, England is the only western Nation that has not yet achieved a Constitution, thus leaving all Law in a state of flux. Moreover, Henry’s own character and way of living showed he was without scruples, morality or good intentions, a dissembler of truth. His real aim was to increase Royal Power by increasing the authority and jurisdiction of Common Law and of his appointed Judges by creating a new Nobility of Pen and Law, the arm-chair fighters, wrongly believing he could always control and dictate to them, since he alone had the power to choose and elect his clerks and judges, at the expense of existing cheks provided by the Church and the Nobility of the Sword, which is the true Nobility, insofaras it is the only real people prepared to fight injustice consistently for honour and justice. Eventually these new creations eroded even the authority and the power of the Monarch destroying the old nobility, opening the way, after the French Revolution and the rise of the Era of the so called Enlightenment, to a distorted Democracy stressing Freedom rather than Duty and Justice. Notice in fact how the USA have not got the statue of Justice ( which has a higher and more inclusive status than Liberty ) but that of Liberty on both New York’s Harbour and at the top of the Capitol. A serious error of moral evaluation with dire consequences to-day as Liberty has allowed the rise to power, infiltrations and take-overs of wealthy Mafiosi and the general decadence and corruption of the West!
The strength of character of the old nobility in England was amply
demonstrated by characters such as Sir Geffrey de Magnaville who fought King Stephen, Sir Geoffrey de Mandeville, who together with Sir Roger de Quency opposed King John, Robert Ferrers the fourth Earl of Derby, who fought King Henry II for 16 years, William Ferrers the sixth Earl of Derby who diplomatically opposed during his long life Kings, from John to Henry III, Simon de Montfort and Robert Ferrers the eigth and last Earl of Derby wo fought King Henry III and Edward I with tragic results.
To-day ( 2009) the danger is the Judiciary System gets infiltrated by Mafiosi elements as it has happened in Italy and elsewhere, and there is then no other power to reform the whole judiciary structure. Civil War becomes the only solution, like was the case in Franco’s Spain in 1938, but a Civil War-leader does not happen everyday, especially in the yellow-bellied, brainwashed societies the West is breeding to-day with modern advertising. Republics, in a worse situation than Monarchies, show everywhere the weackness of an abused Democratic System of Governmment. By default, a stalemate is reached in which corruption rules and nothing is done.
Again, the Common Law is only as good as the people of a Nation are. With the present abuses of Democracy, and the corruption of the Mafiosi leaders and of the Middle Classes, the Law suffers from being biased in favour of the moneyed individuals and is too expensive for the average citizen. Even when the scenario were to be uncorrupted, what may appear to be acceptable and normal to-day may not have been so in Henry’s times, when justice depended much on the activities of some good powerful Nobles or Institutions who had the power to oppose a corrupt Monarchy. The Military Monastic Order of the Templars was such a Power in the Europe of the Middle Ages. An example of this to-day would be the United Nations. However, in this there is too much collusion against the West by Islam, India and China with Third World Nations. What the world needs to-day, is a strong, Christian, healthy European Union, with a strong balance of checks, between a Parliament, a Senate and a Monarchich Assembly or something similar, and of course, a strong, flexible, open-ended Constitution to protect the endurance of the system and to prevent infiltrations and its being taken over by foreign elements, factors, forces and powers.
The members of the Monarchich Assembly would, like the Royal Monarchs of Islam ( i.e., Saudi Arabia ) only marry members from within its own ranks or from families recognised as being the descendents of old European Noble Houses, not for racial motivations, but in order to avoid the infiltration from incompatible foreign cultural elements aiming at unreciprocated take-overs. Try and find out how many barriers there would be to infiltrate the Saudi Arabian Monarchy.
In any case, the fact remains that, in spite of all evidence that Henry improved the administration of the law, he was an absolute Monarch that did not hesitate to use evil ways to attain his aims, as the case of the murder of Saint Thomas a’Becket shows and his exhorbitant ruinous, ruthless taxation that alienated all the people subjected to his rule in the Angevin Empire. As stated already, I am not an enemy of the Church of Rome, which is an institution worth saving, except that I believe Constantinianism is now redundant and obsoleted, as it has been infiltrated the world over by criminal forces, and is supported by Mafiosi bent on controlling the Roman Church which must get rid of them, since they represent, in spite of their chamaleontic camouflages, adaptations and charitable/humane impersonations, in Europe and in the West in general, traditional, political, foreign, destructive inplants and infiltrations, inimical to the West. Let us never forget that the beginnings of the Mafia in Sicily and Calabria were Saracenic ( islamic) fifth columns left behind by the Moslems withdrawing from these areas when the Germans and the Normans defeated them. There might have been a feigned conversion to Christianity, but this has been only skin deep. My ancestors went to Sicily to civilise the land but no one ever succeeded. My Branch left Sicily in 1800, except for a few of us who became hopelessly and inextricably mixed with the local riff-raff. Even Ferreri, Ferrari, Ferrero, etc., to-day in Australia and America have lost the traditions and knowlege of our noble past as “ gensferreria/ferraria ”. King Henry II’s feud against Saint Thomas may appear to have been justified by unrealistic priviledges safeguarded by the then too powerful and wealthy Constantinian Church, however balanced by the power of the Templars until 1300, bordering on injustice, protecting criminal prelates among the Clergy, however, let us also recognise the fact that the Clergy is subjected to by far greater temptations and forces of evil than the average person and should perhaps be judged by their own peers, however this cojncession should not have meant negligence and an abuse of justice. Henry’s aim was to decrease the Church’s power seeking the increase of Royal Power. This was shown in the reign of King Henry VIII when the humiliation of Rome was to serve his lust and attempts at siring a male issue from a succession of marriages, a vane one, owing to the fact that his reproductive system had been damaged by STDs ( syphilis ) acquired in his dissolute youth. The fact that his wife and his sons opposed him most of the time does also not go in his favour. His times were those in which the Nobility was asking for unfettered balancing judicial checks, both against the encroachment of the Church and of the King. Magna Charta and the Provisions of Oxford and Westminster were to be achieved only in the times of King Edward I
( 1272-1307 ), after the rebellion of Simon de Montfort, the Earl of Leicester to which Sir Robert Ferrers participated (1241-1279 ).
A new Religious movement had actually risen in Italy, that of the Franciscans, clamoring for justice and the protection of the poor, and was replacing the persecuted Order of Templars. Simon de Montfort was a Third Order ( lay) Franciscan. These were the times when the whole of Christendom was debating the issue of Church and religious poverty.
The struggle for Magna Charta backed by the Order of Templars, had begun in the times of Sir Robert Ferrers ( died 1173 ), Lord Tutburie, the third Earl of Derby, who rebelled against King Henry I, in a rebellion that lasted for 16 years, in support of Queen Eleanor and her sons aiming at curbing Henry’s obsessions with further imperial expansion that was causing increasing property in the Angevin Empire. How could a Knight, a Baron or an Earl find the surplus capital required to stimulate the economy of his estates and the welfare of his subjects as well to finance the costs of an unending War for Empire, with the new nobility of arm-chairs nobles, the itinerant Royal judges and their pen-pushers breathing down their necks and lusting for a share of their wealth?
The sixth Earl of Derby, Sir William Ferrers( died 1247 ), perhaps the most brilliant among the eight in relation to the difficulties in which he was forced to ac by his times, also opposed absolute monarchich power, in support of Magna Charta, however using diplomacy rather than violence and brute force. He lived though at the times when the Order of Templars to which he participated was still being alert, effective, feared and respected by the Monarchs and the Church. Even so, all this opposition by the Barons to the centralisation of all powers in the Monarchy, had to be prolonged until the times when Simon de Montfort ( 1251-1266 ) was forced into a rebellion, against his wishes for peace and justice and his loyalty to the Crown, that almost wiped out the Plantagenets. The proof of what I am saying is in the fact that he fought his last Battles ( Lewis and Evesham ) while holding King Henry III a prisoner in his camp, instead of having had him executed as he should have.
See “ Simon de Montfort and His Cause ”, by Rev. W. H. Hutton, London, 1888, G. P. Putnam’s Sons, a little work that shows the honesty and good will of Simon the Earl of Leicester. On the other hand, L. F. Salzman’s
“ Edward I ”, although confirming the prolongation of the struggle for judiciary balances in the times of this King, fails to do justice to the cause of Sir Robert Ferrers whom he dismisses without any research of his motives and of his aims, not even mentioning de Montfort and the fact that Robert had joined the latter’s rebellion, being made a scapegoat, while de Clare and others had been pardoned.
I quote from page 45-:
Early in 1273, there had been a rising, anarchical and aimless, in the north; Robert de Ferrers, the restless Earl of Derby, had seized Chartley Castle in Staffordshire and had had to be brought to order by a force under Edmund of Lancaster [ to whom later on went all confiscated Ferrers resources ] and the Earl of Lincoln.
Unquote.
Dugdale, an extremely skilled, intelligent, antiquarian, lawyer and heraldist, of the newly created petty noblity, nevertheless still a yellow-bellied pen-pusher, unfit to be called an Historian, in his “Antiquities of Warwickshire ” also comments as one who blindly and servilely believes that every opposition to the Government ( the Monarchy ) isalways wrong. He was a King Herald of Arms, a very gifted man, but he belonged to the nobility of the pen, of lawyers, people who fought sitting in armchairs.
As a contrast, there is not one Battle of the English Middle Ages in which the Ferrers and their Peers, did not participate, including the famous, mythical ones of Agincourt, Crecy and Poitiers when the English fought the French outnumbered-: 1 Englishman against 10 Frenchmen.
Chartley was a Castle/Barony in Staffordshire, located in the Hundred of Pirehill, some three miles south-west of Loxley ( famous for Robin Hood’s birthplace ), in the Hundred of Totmonslow. According to Erdeswicke, Chartley had been part of the ancient patrimony of the Earls of Chester, acquired by these directly from the Crown soon after the redaction of Domesday Book. It had been acquired by Sir William Ferrers
( died 1247), the sixth Earl of Derby in the days of his marriage to Agness, the third daughter of Hugh de Kevelioc, the fifth Earl of Chester, sister and co-heiress of Ranulph de Blondeville, the sixth Earl of Chester, Duke of Brittany...............etc., who died without issue.
The Arms Vairee or et gules that had been inherited by the marriage of the third Earl of Derby ( died 1173 ) to Margaret, the daughter of William Peverell, the Baron of Nottingham, became associated with Chartley in the new Barony in Fee begun after the loss of the Earldom of Derby in 1266. Since de Chartley was a Ferrers’ possession sourced by their matriarchal lines, it had not been subjected to confiscation by the Crown and as a matter of fact it allowed John the son of Robert Ferrers, the last Earl of Derby, the disgraced rebel, the foundation for a request of a Chartered Barony of de Chartley to be approved together with a pardon, by both the Crown and Parliament, the date of obtainment of which is a matter of controversy as discussed in Vol.I of “Baronies In Fee ”, A Concentrated Account of all these so called Baronies compiled from BARONIA ANGLICA CONCENTRATA by Sir T. C. Banks Bart. N.S., RIPON.
It is most likely that Robert Ferrers was fighting to retrieve an ancient maternal inheritance to which the Ferrers’ Coat of Arms, Vairee’ or et gules were linked, something every noble in England would have respected and assented to, rather than seizing a new possession as the sycophant and ignoramus L. F. Salzman reports. It is important to realise that the Ferrers had already lost the use of their ancient, original Coat of Arms, the one born by the first Earl of Derby, born in ca. 1083, prior to the Chartley-one, which they had
inherited from the Peverells. The ancient Arms had in fat been placed in abeyance, following the rebellion by Robert the fourth Earl of Derby, when King Henry II had punished him with the loss of Tutbury Castle at the border between Staffordshire and Derbyshire, to which these Arms had been linked. Arms that are linked to an Honour or a Title are placed in abeyance when the Honour or Title is lost. Salszman should have known this when making judgmental comments about Robert Ferrers the eigth Earl, in his dismissive, condescending, superior ways.
Please remember that the first Robert’s crime had been to support Queen Eleanor and her sons as the loyal response to the Norman line, his right and duty toward the memory of his liege Lord William the Conqueror. Henry II, had he been a noble character should have understood and appreciated that loyalty to one’s ancient vows and oaths of fealty. Was that the Royal Justice inspired to the newly created Itinerant Royal Judges, so praised and sung by that nitwit, Anderson, of BBC-fame?
It is obvious to anyone considering the enormous power and resources held by the Ferrers as the Earls of Derby, that they could not remain neutral in the struggles between the Barons and the Monarchy.
It is also obvious to one who keeps on reading the History of this House with an open mind, seeking the path of Justice in history, that the Ferrers, whose Line eventually failed in the male issue and who were to be taken over by the Devereux, when Walter Devereux ( 1461-1485 ) became the 7th Baron Ferrers of Chartley through his marriage to Anne Ferrers born 1438, the only daughter of William Ferrers of Chartley
(1412-1450 ), still kept seeking justice rather than self-aggrandisement
when, in the person of Sir Robert Devereux-Ferrers (1591-1646 ), Knight, 12th Baron Ferrers of Chartley, Earl of Essex, Viscount Hereford, Baron Bourchier, financed, organised, trained and led Cromwell’s Roundheads in the days of the protestant “ Puritans ” fighting against the idea of the Rule by Divine Right of the Stewart Monarchs.
However even before these times, the Devereux-Ferrers showed their loyalty to the Crown, when this required a legitimate and just action, in spite of the persecutions and injustices the Crown had inflicted onto their House, thus showing thei purity and nobility of their character and action, when Sir Walter Devereux-Ferrers, Knight, the 7th Baron Ferrers of Chartley, died on 22bd August 1485 with three of his sons at the tragic battle of Bosworth, in support of the Plantagenet King
Richard III. Another famous member of this House, sir Robert Devereux-Ferrers ( 1568-1601 ), Knight, the 11th Baron Ferrers of Chartley, Earl of Essex, Viscount Hereford, Baron Bourchier, who had become a favourite of Queen Elisabeth I, was condemned to death on trumped up charges, beheaded and atteinted in 1600-1 by a corrupt Parliament, filled with the afore mentioned pen-pushers, Lawyers and servile Judjes.
His son, Sir Robert Devereux-Ferrers Knight, was eventually restored in blood and honours in 1604 since Queen Elisabeth died in 1603.
To conclude, let me make a short list of grievances the Ferrers have had against the English Monarchs which point to the possibility they were continuously being provoked by their jealousy about their successes, good-will, their power for good they never abused, using it only when some cause in the name of Justice required it of them, in accordance to conscience, duty and wealth as the Earls of Derby-:
(1) King Henry II (1154-1189 ) conveniently overlooked the fact that Robert the fourth Earl had cavalierly supported his wife Eleanor, who was of Norman descent, like the Ferrers who owed loyalty to the memory of the Conqueror, against Henry’s abuses. Henry should also have punished his wife and sons who had also rebelled, but did not. The walls of Tutburie Castle were reduced in height and the Ferrers lost the use of their ancestral Arms, which had become associated with the Honour of Tutbury, i.e., Argent, six horseshoes sable nailed or, arrayed 3, 2, 1. Duffield Castle was reduced to its foundations and remained so untill to-day.
(2) Agatha, Robert’s daughter was seduced by King John, abused as a mistress and Joane, John’s illegitimate daughter sent into exhile, married off to LLewelin the Prince of Wales who had fought against Robert and Eleanor, had captured Robert’s brother, Walchelinus, the Baron of Eggington, Joanne's uncle, and had hung him.
(3) Robert the eigth and last Earl of Derby had not participated in the Battle of Evesham ( some say he was forced to do so by Simon, against his will) that saw the defeat of Simon de Montfort, withdrawing from the cause of Simon after the Battle of Lewis ( 1263) together with de Clare who was of higher status than he was. Yet he was severely punished while de Clare and others were pardoned. His daughter Elisabeth was married off to the Welsh Prince as a way to exhile.
A short account of the debacle is supplied in “ A Survey of Staffordshire ” by Sampson Erdeswicke................together with “ The History and Antiquities of that County ”, by Reverend Thomas Hardwood, B.D.F.S.A, see pages 398-400.
The Latin petition sent by Robert to King Henry III is therein given. A short history of the strategically important Castle of Tutburie is also given therein.
(4) It is probable that had the Order of the Templars survived the French and Papal collusion, Sir Robert Ferrers would have retained the Earldom of Derby since there would not have been rebellions against the power-usurping and taxation-grasping Monarchy. However, even after their impoverishment and the reduction of the Ferrers' Power in Staffordshire where the bulk of their Manors had been
( 114 out of 210 ), they were suspected of hoarding Templar resources.
King Henry VIII, in his policy against Rome, confiscated Church-property which he distributed among his new nobility of pen-pushers, itinerant judges, and sycophants.He ordered Abbeys destroyed and their foundations dug-up, sent clergymen, nuns, monks and religious persons loyal to Rome to starve in the streets and the countryside.
This was the fate of Merevale Abbey, that had been founded as a Cistercian Abbey/Monastery by Robert Ferrers, the second Earl of Derby
( 1101-1163 ), who donated the extensive Forests of Arden to this
foundation. It was dug-up to below its foundations in search for treasure and is now Merevale Farm sporting on the rebuilt Gate House the Arms of the Dugdales, the sycophantic pen-pushers.
I was able to locate it because I had made a copy of an old Road Map in Australia from a Map in the Coburg’s Library. Present Maps do not bother to show it any longer. Yet there is there the original Gate- Church of Our Lady of Merevale, now inside the rebuilt Gate- House, and it contains four Ferrers-tombs/effigies, spanning from 1198 to 1450.
It is clear the National Trust should be actively involved but is not.
It appears as if, in spite of the pride, love and care of the Anglican lady Minister, these are condemned to slow decay and disappearance for lack of maintenance.
The most ancient of these structures is the Knight-effigy of Sir William Ferrers, Lord Ferrers, Lord Tutbury, the fifth Earl of Derby, who died in ca. 1197, a crusading Knight, in the siege of Acre in Palestine, during the Third Crusade, led by King Richard I, the Lion-Heart.
His effigy is coeval with and made by the same artist who made the one in the Church of the Templars, at Temple Court in London near the Thames River, for Sir Geoffrey de Mandeville the second Earl of Essex, one of the leaders with Sir R oger de Quincy ( died 1264 ) in the struggle for Magna Charta and the Provisions of Oxford and Westminster.
Sir Geoffrey de Mandeville had also participated in the third Crusade with Sir William Ferrers but had survived and returned to England.
Incidentally, the Ferrers’s effigy has been wrongly identified in the past by so called experts, as belonging to Sir William Ferrers (1200-1254),
the seventh Earl of Derby, and I have been able to rectify the error, after my visit to Merevale Church in 2004, upon my return to Australia when becoming by chance confronted with Sir Geoffrey’s effigy from a drawing by Stothard the Scottish Archaeological Draughtsman, who wrongly assigned it to Sir Geffrey de Magnaville an anscestor of de Mandeville living in tempore King Stephen.
I hope my efforts shall be graciously recognised.
