APPENDIX S

THE WELFS

We will need to write a short permission in order to understand the origins of the House of Welf (Guelfi) and their opponents, the Ghibellins.

The Welfs indeed sided with the Pope, but surely not with our saviour Jesus Christ.

These are royals, noble families, potentates and they get together forming these groups that will fight for their power seeking campaigns.

Just dive inside the symbols of their coat of arms and heraldics and you will find out the same dirty spurious symbols that can be traced as far back as Babylon.

Are you familiar with THE ANZU BIRD which you will find in their coat of arms?

The Anzu bird, half-lion, half-eagle, appears in Sumerian literary works as a wild creature of the mountains. It can also be tamed by the gods, as depicted in monumental sculpture.

Anzû, also called dZû and Imdugud (Sumerian: 𒀭𒅎𒂂 dim.dugudmušen), is a Mesopotamian demon conceived by the Abzu and Mami, or as the son of Siris.

In Babylonian LORE, Anzû was a massive, fire- and water-breathing bird, sometimes with a lion’s head. This likely references earlier Sumerian myths where he appears as a half-human storm bird who stole the tablet of destiny, challenging Enlil’s power over the gods organizing Mesopotamian agriculture.

These houses were clubs of the European Black Nobility, particularly infamous Italian families.

The Younger House of Welf, the older branch of the Welf-Este dynasty, traces its origins to Veneto and Lombardy in the late 9th/early 10th century with members such as Welf I, Duke of Bavaria (Welf IV). He inherited from his maternal uncle, Welf III, Duke of Carinthia and Verona, the last male of the Elder House of Welf, in 1055.

Welf IV was the son of Welf III’s sister, Kunigunde of Altdorf, and Albert Azzo II, Margrave of Milan. He became Duke of Bavaria in 1070.

Welf II, Duke of Bavaria, married Countess Matilda of Tuscany. Her childless death bequeathed him Tuscany, Ferrara, Modena, Mantua, and Reggio, possessions which became relevant during the Investiture Controversy. As the Welf dynasty supported the Pope, their supporters became known as Guelphs (Guelfi) in Italy.

The Genealogia Welforum, composed before 1126, represents the first Welf genealogy. The Historia Welforum, a more detailed history of the dynasty, appeared around 1170, marking the earliest history of a noble house in Germany.

I urge everyone to thoroughly investigate these two power groups. I can’t delve deeply into the subject here due to space constraints. Let’s move on to analyze the Welfs’ opponents, the infamous Ghibelline house.

THE GHIBELLINES

Waiblingen, formerly Wibeling—from which the word “Ghibelline” derives—identified the supporters of the Hohenstaufen, the Swabian lords of Waiblingen Castle. Later, the Swabian dynasty acquired the imperial crown, and with Frederick Barbarossa sought to consolidate its power in the Kingdom of Italy.

Politically, the Ghibellines came to be identified with the faction aligned with the emperor, and their military structures were characterized by swallow-tailed battlements. Their banner depicted the cross of Saint John the Baptist.

Their coat of arms displays a Babylonian symbol of blasphemy and power. We will examine their attempted association with John the Baptist, considering his life and teachings—Jesus deemed him the greatest human born of a woman—and contrasting those views with the practices of this house of impostors.

Babylon is symbolized as a great eagle in biblical literature, primarily in Old Testament prophetic writings, to convey its power, reach, and eventual downfall.

Eagles embody strength, swiftness, and dominance, mirroring the Babylonian Empire’s peak. The eagle, associated with kingship and divine authority in the ancient Near East, aptly represents Babylon’s widespread influence.

Ezekiel 17 uses eagle imagery, featuring two eagles and a vine. The first eagle, “great” with “great wings, long pinions, full of feathers of many colors,” symbolizes the king of Babylon. It takes the top of a cedar to a city of merchants, representing the Babylonian king’s conquest and the deportation of Judean leaders.

The vine, initially flourishing under the first eagle, seeks sustenance from another, breaching covenant and leading to destruction, highlighting the futility of foreign alliances over divine trust.

The eagle’s representation reflects Babylon’s expansion, especially under Nebuchadnezzar II, who conquered Jerusalem in 586 BC. The eagle’s flight mirrors Babylon’s influence and military strength.

Theologically, Babylon as a great eagle reminds of God’s ultimate authority. Despite Babylon’s power, prophetic literature emphasizes its temporary nature and divine judgment. The eagle symbolizes both Babylon’s might and its divinely ordained downfall.

Royal houses are clubs for gnostics and heretics. A spurious Gnosticism, Mandaeism (from Aramaic “Manda” meaning knowledge), venerates John the Baptist and hides, even today, as the “Knights of St. John,” a Masonic title. Their doctrines should be investigated.

Mandaeism, also known as Nasoraeanism or Sabianism, is a Gnostic, monotheistic, ethnic religion with Greek, Iranian, and Jewish influences. Mandaeans revere Adam, Abel, Seth, Enos, Noah, Shem, Aram, and especially John the Baptist, considering Adam, Seth, Noah, Shem, and John the Baptist prophets, with Adam being the founder and John the greatest and final prophet.

Mandaeans speak Mandaic, an Eastern Aramaic language. ‘Mandaean’ derives from the Aramaic *manda*, meaning knowledge. They are also known as Ṣubba or Sabians. *Ṣubba* comes from an Aramaic root related to baptism. *Sabians* references a religious group mentioned in the Quran, historically claimed by Mandaeans and others for legal protection under Islamic law. Occasionally, they are called “Christians of Saint John,” though Mandaeans consider Jesus a false prophet.

The core doctrine is Nāṣerutā (Nasoraean gnosis or divine wisdom), with adherents called nāṣorāyi (Nasoraeans or Nazorenes). These are divided into *tarmidutā* (priesthood) and *mandāyutā* (laity), the latter from *manda* (knowledge). Mandaeism encompasses their culture, rituals, beliefs, and faith associated with Nāṣerutā. Followers can also be called Gnostics or Sabians.

The religion is primarily practiced around the lower Karun, Euphrates, Tigris, and Shatt al-Arab waterways, in southern Iraq and Khuzestan, Iran. In 2007, there were an estimated 60,000–70,000 Mandaeans worldwide.

Until the Iraq War, almost all lived in Iraq; many have since fled due to the war and sectarian violence. By 2007, the Mandaean population in Iraq was approximately 5,000.

Mandaeans have remained separate and private. Reports primarily come from outsiders like Julius Heinrich Petermann, Nicolas Siouffi, Lady E. S. Drower, and Jean-Baptiste Tavernier.

Read Revelation to understand the fate awaiting earthly kings and potentates. The lake of fire awaits the eagles and kings of this world; they are aware of this. At Christ’s return, they will attempt to hide underground like beetles, as foretold.

Revelation 6:15

15 Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and everyone else, both slave and free, hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains.

16 They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!

17 For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can withstand it?”

Following this introduction, we continue with Evola and his views on the Ghibellines. This preamble was nonetheless necessary to provide context.

The Grail’s regality, and its order, held significance in the visible and secret forces during the romances’ popularity. The Grail’s hidden primordial seat symbolizes a regal power’s shift from visible to occult. This kingdom, a center attracting the elect worldwide, sends knights on secret missions and produces kings of unknown origin. The inaccessible Grail endures, unbound to earthly kingdoms, uniting individuals beyond physical birth through unique dignity. Like Arthur’s kingdom, it persists, polar and unmoving, as history flows around it. The Ghibelline Middle Ages approached this kingdom, potentially manifesting it in a spiritual-temporal unity. The Grail’s regality marked the medieval imperial apex, a climate expressed through legend rather than political ideology. Understanding this requires revisiting Western metaphysics, which will be stated axiomatically.

THE INTERNAL CONFLICT

Rome’s internal decay and political collapse marked the failure to shape the West imperially. Christianity’s dualism and religious character accelerated dissociation, leading to medieval civilization after Nordic invasions, resurrecting the empire’s symbol in the Holy Roman Empire. This “restoration” and “continuation” aimed for an ecumenical “solar” synthesis, implying Christianity’s transcendence and inevitable conflict with the Church of Rome’s hegemonic claims, resulting in Guelphism’s theocratic vision.

Medieval civilization comprised Nordic-pagan, Christian, and Roman elements. Nordic influence shaped ethics, lifestyle, and social structure, crucial to feudalism, chivalry, courtly life, and the crusading spirit. While the Northern races weren’t “barbarian” in values, their spiritual traditions exhibited involution, with fragmented echoes of a primordial Nordic-Hyperborean tradition leading to superstition. Tough, warlike lifestyles prevailed. Nordic-Germanic traditions, largely the Eddas, retained depleted residues of a broader metaphysical scope.

The Nordic tradition was in involutive latency until contact with Christianity and Rome revitalized it. Christianity revived transcendence, and the Roman symbol offered a universal regnum, an imperial aeternitas.

THE GRAIL QUEST IS JUST A RESTORATION OF POWER HIDDEN BEHIND CORRUPTED SPIRITUAL DOCTRINES.

This integration of Nordic elements fueled a “heroic” restoration, transforming warriors into knights. Germanic war traditions evolved into crusades, and tribal princes into sacred emperors claiming divine authority. This renaissance, however, needed a higher focal point than the Church or Empire: the Grail myth. The Ghibelline Middle Ages sought a hero to ask the question that restores power. The Middle Ages awaited the Grail hero to embody a Universal Ruler, renew forces, and establish a solar order, unifying the invisible and visible emperor. The true significance lies not in the Christianized or Celtic/Nordic interpretations of the Grail, but in realizing the paralyzed king’s tragedy and initiating restorative action.

THE LORE IS NEEDED BY THE POTENTATE

To question equals defining the problem. Heroic indifference, a grievous flaw after realizing earthly and spiritual knighthood and knowing the Grail, manifests as uninquiring observation of the coffin and ailing king, be he wounded, dead, or feigning life. The Grail hero’s dignity is obligatory, specific, prevalent, and antimystical. Historically, the Grail kingdom, meant for restoration to greater heights, mirrors the Empire; the Grail hero, potentially “lord of all creatures” with “supreme power,” embodies Emperor Federicus, should he realize the Grail’s mystery or become the Grail itself. Certain texts present this theme directly: the chosen knight, bypassing ceremony, bluntly demands of the king, “Where is the Grail?” meaning, “Where is the power you should represent?” This question triggers a miracle. Ancient Atlantic, Celtic, and Nordic fragments mingle with Judeo-Christian imagery: Avalon, Seth, Solomon, Lucifer, the stone-thunderbolt, Joseph of Arimathea, the White Island, the fish, the Lord of the Center and his seat’s symbolism, the mystery of revenge and deliverance, and the Tuatha de Danaan’s “signs,” conflated with the Grail’s bringers – forming a cohesive whole for those discerning its essence. For a century and a half, the Arthurian myth of the Grail quest gripped the West, saturating the historical climate before a sudden rupture. This reflects a heroic tradition linked to a universal imperial ideal.

The Church instinctively understood the force gathering behind the chivalric spirit and Ghibelline ideal, which drove its opposition to the Empire.

While imperial defenders only partially grasped this force due to internal conflicts and ambiguities, the Church’s intuition was accurate. This understanding shaped the drama of medieval Ghibellinism, the great knightly orders, and especially the Knights Templar.

APPENDIX T

Julius Evola’s intellectual honesty is admirable in this passage; he acknowledges the incompatibility between his polytheistic, regal, pseudo-values and the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Evola’s teachings are condemned in the Old and New Testaments, predating the Church’s existence. His solar worship deception likely infiltrated the Church, as Church fathers fought to defend the Apostles’ teachings from the beginning.

The primary early enemies, in the first two centuries, were the Valentinians, Meneander, and Hellenized Judeo-Gnostics, who were a source of heresies. Scripturally, they are akin to Simon the magician, rebuked by the Apostles for attempting to purchase the gift of the Holy Spirit for personal gain. This episode originates the term “Simony,” referring to the desacration of sacred things for personal profit.

These were the earliest Gnostics. Valentinus was a veritable powerhouse of heresies. He could speak and write in numerous languages and perform occult trickery in the manner of his predecessor, Simon Magus.

These doctrines were a composite of diverse heresies joined together by the mysterious and secretive attitude inherent in Gnosticism. They comprised a blend of an allegorical approach to scripture derived from authors such as Philo Judaeus, who exemplified Hellenized Judaism, wherein the teachings of the Babylonian Kabbalah mingled with the teachings of Pythagoras and Plato, thereby creating a novel form of heresy in the Western world known as Neoplatonism.

Many contemporary Christians remain unaware of the severe condemnation that the Church Fathers delivered upon philosophers for blending their fantasies and polytheistic heresies into the Christian world.

Following the Gnostics, Nestorius and Arius arose as subsequent adversaries, propagating two potent heresies. The Council of Nicaea convened specifically to refute Arius and his claims. Moreover, in the writings of Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, and indeed throughout the collective works of the Church Fathers spanning the initial four centuries, it remains evident that they possessed a clear understanding of the authentic books comprising the New Testament well before the close of the first century. This assertion is extensively documented within the extant texts authored by these figures.

The canonization process served primarily as an administrative acknowledgment aimed at safeguarding the truth against subsequent heresies, rather than functioning as a means for the Church itself to ascertain which books were deemed canonical. In short, the orthodox believers had possessed knowledge of the genuine Gospels for approximately three centuries prior; Nicaea sought to defend the Word from impostors such as Arius and Nestorius.

The Templars’ cry was “Long Live God Holy Love!” Jacques de Baisieux equated “Holy Love” with God and a heavenly region. Love’s Lieges were armed and secretive, bound by oaths to conceal secrets and act in unison. Francesco da Barberino depicted the Court of Love as a hierarchical, heavenly court mirroring the Grail castle. This aligns with bird imagery representing the Court of Love. Da Barberino, a soldier and Ghibelline supporter, exemplifies the active nature of Italian love poets, many Ghibellines with possible heretical leanings. Troubadours like Figueira and Anelier opposed the Church. Andrea Cappellano’s treatise was condemned. Dante, using the Templar seal in his work, secretly traveled to Paris during the Templar tragedy. These points suggest the Love’s Lieges were an initiatory group with an organization supporting the Empire against the Church, holding a secret doctrine incompatible with Catholic teachings.

THE INFILTRATION IN THE HOLY CHURCH

Rossetti, Aroux, Valli, Ricolfi, and Alessandrini endorsed this thesis, some focusing on the political. This symbolism suggests the organization identified with the woman as doctrine’s keeper.

“Love laws” are interpreted as solidarity, such as a woman giving herself to her perfect lover. Dante’s exiled Beatrice (Holy Wisdom) is replaced by the Catholic Church’s exotericism, symbolized by the “petrifying stone.”

Da Barberino’s figures depict hierarchical degrees, the lower being “religious cadavers” mirroring Dante’s “death stone.” Ecclesiastical hierarchy lacks the “vivifying knowledge” of the true woman, the Widow, or “deserving knight.” Love’s secrecy is also reflected in “Love hardly lasts when divulgated.” Templar cords and gloves linked to Grail quests suggest initiation trials.

The Love’s Lieges, historically militia and Ghibelline organization, is depicted by da Barberino’s illustration: Death defeats Love. Valli interprets Death as the Church and the pierced woman as the Love’s Lieges. The divided Love represents the persecuted and the hidden parts of the organization. Symbolically, the left side signifies the occult. The Love’s Lieges followed the “path of love.” The woman’s appearance as Holy Wisdom suggests a sapiential plane.

The “path of love” was central to the tradition’s initiation. Love’s Lieges’ initiation, with the female figure as Holy Wisdom, suggests a sapiential and contemplative plane tied to ecstasy. Da Barberino’s reference to religious orders entering “celestem curiam” likely refers to those who transcend the faith’s exoteric aspects. Dante’s “scattered limbs” refer to the organization’s dispersed groups.

This Ghibellinism lacked a fitting spiritual counterpart, making it a “dissociated form.”

The Love’s Lieges’ anti-ecclesiastical stance may have been circumstantial, not a fundamental break from Catholicism, which can accommodate contemplation.

They likely favoured a purified Catholicism, viewing Dante’s “stone” as the Church, corrupted and failing to uphold Christ’s doctrine. Thus, they opposed the Church for betraying Christian ideals, not for representing an alternative tradition.

Therefore, Dante and the Love’s Lieges differ from Grail knights. Their “Widow” symbolized a weakened tradition, potentially reconcilable with renewed Catholicism, evidenced by Dante’s view on Church-Empire relations.

Dante’s dualism, emphasizing contemplative vs. active life, led him to criticize the Church’s earthly pursuits and imperial usurpation. Logically, he should have also opposed imperial overreach into spiritual matters. His stance stemmed from a “regal” spirituality, not purely purified Catholicism. Despite his “esotericism,” Dante was more poet/fighter than dogmatic theorist, showing passion in temporal matters but leaning Christian in spiritual ones, causing inconsistencies. He likely started from Catholic tradition, trying to elevate it, rather than connecting directly to pre-Christian traditions like the Grail cycle.

Love’s Lieges, a Ghibelline group, held higher knowledge but a weakened imperial view. Positively, their Court of Love represented an immaterial kingdom, embodying suprarational realization, mirroring the Grail legend’s pessimistic end: the Grail’s disappearance and Percival’s asceticism.

Tradition, increasingly divested of its militant aspect and sometimes revivifying deeper and more original currents, was especially preserved in this form in the following period. In Italy, the Love’s Lieges movement lasted until Boccaccio and Petrarch, assuming increasingly humanistic traits, until the artistic aspect prevailed over the esoteric.

Symbols were then transformed into mere allegories, their meaning lost even to those who employed them in their poems.

By the early seventeenth century, the vital principle of tradition appears to have been totally extinguished, both generally and in individual authors.

For any continuation, one must look to other groups and currents.

The Templars…