To what extent does the historical context surrounding the documents further the understanding of which events and circumstances referred to within and surrounding the documents are true, and which have been skewed and or falsified?
So, what is actually true about the Knights Templar? It is certain that they were a military organization during the crusades, and that they were held immense wealth and power, in part because they were responsible for creating the first rudimentary banking system. It is also certain that they were disbanded by Pope Clement V.
However, much of the content between the two time periods of the Templar’s creation and their demise is open to speculation. The charges laid against the members of the order were never fully proven, as there was no evidence towards the claims, except rumor and confessions procured by torture. Furthermore, the motives King Philip IV had to disband the brotherhood may also be speculated, and could be a combination of many. Not to mention, there is no knowledge of the whereabouts of the supposed treasure of the Templar, nor their religious artifacts.
In this case, it is difficult to discern rumor and speculation from fact. What we can be certain of is that the characters mentioned within the depositions of Jacques de Molay and Hugh de Pairaud were real individuals. However, it cannot be claimed that Jacques and Hugh did commit the crimes they did or did not admit to, based on our knowledge of the conniving strategies of Prince Philip IV, and also considering that the treatment of Jacques and Hugh (while imprisoned) is to a great extent, unbeknownst to us.
Medieval "Real" News 