Evola's assessment of the Templars (incidentally a subject touching
me personally) couldn't be clearer: "Among the various knightly
orders, the Order of the Knights Templar was the one that more than
others overcame the double limitations constituted, on the one hand,
by the mere warrior ideal of the secular knighthood and, on the
other hand, by the merely ascetic ideal of Christianity and its
monastic orders. The Order of the Knights Templar approached more
than others the type of the `spiritual chivalry of the Grail.'" [p.
128. The Mystery of the Grail]
"The destruction of this order coincides with the interruption of
the metaphysical tension of the Ghibelline Middle Ages… This marks
the beginning of the decline of the West." [p.129]
Hypotheses as to the relationship between a manipulative Judaism and
the Templars apparently didn't exist in Evola's mind. Hardly any
other group or order receives this type of commendation in his
works. If the speculations concerning the destructive ambiance
surrounding the Knights Templar have a basis, is Evola's competence
so low as to allow such a grand mistake on his part?
Also, Aryans are, after all, Ares-born and their dynamism explodes,
unfortunately, even intra-racially; Aryans have a longstanding
tradition of reckless fratricidal warfare destructive of the lineal
continuity of their own higher castes (Achaeans vs. Trojans, Medes
vs. Persians, etc). Are the machinations of Judaism or Judeo-
Christianity really necessary to effect this "Nordic depopulation"?
As to the Crusades, which are seen by some in a quasi-conspiratorial
fashion, Evola declares: "The historical context in which the
Crusades took place abounds with elements capable of conferring upon
them a potential symbolical and spiritual meaning. The conquest of
the `Holy Land' located `beyond the sea' in reality had many more
connections with ancient traditions than it was first thought;
according to these traditions, `in the ancient East, where the sun
rises, there lies the happy region of the Aesir and in it, the city
of Ayard, where there is no death and where journeyers enjoy a
heavenly peace and eternal life'" [p. 124. Revolt Against the Modern
World]. This Ayard, which obviously corresponds to Asgard, home of
the Norse 'deities' (i.e. ancestral nobility) and heroes, remarkably
existed, before its memory was wholly mythologized, as an ancient
Persian satrapy and Aryan religious center called ASAGARTA, located
not too far geographically from the battle-scenes of the Crusades.
(One must recall the designation `Germanii' originally goes back to
an Irano-Aryan Persian tribe). See the facts here:
http://www.livius.org/saa-san/sagartia/sagartia.html
So, in a sense, to the Ario-Germanic aristocracy of Europe, their
deep ancestry being what it was, the Crusades could be intuited as
an attempt at a sort of homecoming by the Sons of Asgard, and a
general reclamation of an Asia Minor once subject to the domination
of the Aryan race.
Evola: "The struggle against Islam, by virtue of its nature, shared
from the beginning several common traits with asceticism… Jerusalem,
the military objective of the Crusades, appeared in the double
aspect of an earthly and heavenly city (Jerusalem was often
considered as an image of the mysterious Salem ruled by
Melchizedek); and thus the Crusade became the equivalent in terms of
heroic tradition of a `ritual', a pilgrimage, and the `passion' of
the via crucis.' Moreover, those who belonged to the orders that
contributed the most to the Crusades—such as the Knights Templar and
the Knights of Saint John—were men who, like the Christian monks or
ascetics, learned to despise the vanity of this life; these orders
were the natural retirement place for those warriors who were weary
of the world, who had seen and experienced just about everything,
and who had directed their spiritual quest toward something higher.
The teaching that VITA EST MILITIA TERRAM was instilled in these
knights in an integral, inner, and outer fashion. Through prayers
they readied themselves to fight and to move against the enemy.
Their matins was the trumpet; their hair shirts, the armor they
rarely took off; their fortresses, monasteries; the trophies taken
from the infidels, the relics and the images of saints." [p. 126-7.
Revolt]
"During the Crusades, for the first and only time in post-Roman
Europe, the ideal of the unity of nations (represented in peacetime
by the Empire) was achieved on the plane of action in the wake of a
wonderful elan… The analysis of the deep forces that produced and
directed the Crusades does not fit in with the ideas typical of a
two-dimensional historiography. In the movement toward Jerusalem
what often became manifested was an occult current against papal
Rome that was fostered by Rome itself; in this current chivalry was
the militia and the heroic Ghibelline ideal was the liveliest force.
This current culminated in an emperor who was stigmatized by Gregory
IX as one who `threatens to replace the Christian faith with the
ancient rites of the pagan populations, and who by sitting in the
Temple usurps the functions of the priesthood.' The figure of
Godfrey of Bouillon—the most significant representative of crusader
chivalry, who was called LUX MONARCHORUM (which again reveals the
ascetical and warrior element proper to this knightly aristocracy)—
was that of a Ghibelline prince who ascended to the throne of
Jerusalem after visiting Rome with blood and iron, killing the anti-
Caesar Rudolf of Rhinefeld and expelling the pope from the holy
city. The legend also established a meaningful kingship between this
king of the crusaders and the mythical Knight of the Swan (the
French Helias, the Germanic Lohengrin), who in turn embodied symbols
that were imperially Roman (his symbolic genealogical descent form
Caesar himself), solar (the etymological relation existing between
Helias, Helios, and Elijah), and Hyperborean (the swan that leads
Lohengrin from the `heavenly seat was also the animal representing
Apollo among the Hyperboreans and a recurrent theme in paleographic
traces of the Northern-Aryan cult). The body of such historical and
mythical elements causes Godfrey of Bouillon to be a symbol during
the Crusades, because of the meaning of that secret force that had a
merely external and contingent manifestation in the political
struggle of the Teutonic emperors and in the victory of Otto I." [p.
300-1. Revolt]
So perhaps elements of a decidedly non-Judaic or supra-Judaic
character (Asgard, Melchizedek, Ghibellinism, the Holy Grail,
Hyperborean symbolism, etc.) were operative here?