QUOTE (mairead @ 29th Dec 2014, 12:59pm)
As a historian (published,) I am always wary of ridiculing another person's writing. History itself is vague and depends on documented evidence which also depends on viewpoints, sides religion and other factors. 100% Accurate historical facts could only be produced from one who was there at the time and as no-one was, we each have to accept what various writers past and present have produced through vague fact and their own logic, in the name of history
There is nothing vague about the history of the Templars. They are well documented and thoroughly researched in every concept of their activities from foundation to dissolution. Antonia Fraser in her book on the life of Charles11 quoted no less than 100 sources. We must therefore presume she had an historians regard for accuracy and not some "vague notion" of the veracity of historical licence.
History has the same academic scrutiny that is applied to science and is no less an art for that.
I have no hesitation in ridiculing the ethereal fiction surrounding the Roslyn Chapel and the further nonsense associated with "Mystical Quests" that have their roots in credulous mythology and not historical discipline.