• EN
  • FR
  • DE
  • RU
  • TR
  • ES
  • ES

The Wave Chapter 29: The 3-5 Code: The Journey From Jerusalem To Oak Island Via the Pyrenees

As I mentioned in the last volume, the subject of the 3-5 Code was first brought up on 11-11-95. A lot of people have asked about this strange occurrence of double elevens and I hope to be able to provide some clues to solving that mystery as we go along. But, we will be diverting on several lateral themes as we proceed before coming back to the code, proper, and we start with this frequent need to divert right at the very beginning here.

You see, the whole problem really started with the issue of Jesus. Even though I already had experience with the fact that invoking the name of Jesus really had little (if any) effect whatsoever on the occasions that I had worked with exorcism type activities (and this was troubling, to say the least), I was still in the mode of the standard fundamentalist New Age belief that determining the attitude or teachings about Jesus from any given channeled source would be helpful in determining the orientation of that source and could save you from a lot of problems further down the road.

Like most New Age “elders,” I was still measuring everything by the standard of Edgar Cayce. So, we were asking our Jesus questions as a sort of test for the Cassiopaeans.

Q: (L) Who was Jesus of Nazareth?

A: Advanced spirit.

Q: (L) Was Jesus an individual who had psychic or unusual powers from birth?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Did he have an awareness from the earliest times of his life that he was in some way special or chosen?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Was Jesus born from an immaculate conception, that is, did his mother not have sex with a man in order to conceive him?

A: No.

Q: (L) She did have sex with a man in order to conceive him, is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Who was the man with whom she had sex to conceive Jesus?

A: Tonatha.

Q: (L) And who was this individual, Tonatha?

A: Acquaintance.

Q: (L) Was he selected for some reason to be the biological father of Jesus by other beings or powers?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Can you give us any details about him? What was his lineage, where did he come from, etc?

A: He was a member of the White Sect.

Q: (L) What is the White Sect?

A: AKA Aryans. [This one slipped right by me.]

Q: (L) Was Mary a member of the Essene group?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Was this man also a member of the Essenes?

A: No.

Q: (L) And this person, Tonatha, was chosen to be the biological father of Jesus?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Why did Mary not marry him? [Laura, the eternal romantic!]

A: Feelings were extremely transient. Influenced by telepathic suggestion. Hypnotized level 1.

Q: (L) What date, counting backwards in our calendrical system, was Jesus born on?

A: 01 06 minus 14.

Q: (L) What time of day was he born?

A: 6 am.

Q: (L) Was there any unusual celestial event in terms of star or planet alignments at that time?

A: No.

Q: (L) Was there an event where the Magi came to present gifts?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Who was it that came to present him gifts?

A: 3 prophets.

Q: (L) What country did these prophets come from?

A: Iran. Also known as Persia. [The Persian connection later proves to be very significant.]

Q: (L) What was the “star” that indicated to the prophets …

A: Spaceship.

Q: (L) What kind of spaceship?

A: Mother.

Q: (L) Where did this mothership come from?

A: Other realm.

Q: (L) Does that mean other realm as in dimension or density?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Do we know of these other realms or densities as other star systems or planets?

A: Partly.

Q: (L) Jesus grew up to the age of twelve, at which point he was bar Mitzvahed. Is that correct?

A: He was bar Mitzvahed at the age of 10. Aramaic rite.

Q: (L) Did Jesus, during the course of his growing up years travel to other countries and study under other masters?

A: No.

Q: (L) Where did he receive his teaching or training?

A: Channeled to him.

Q: (L) Did he at any point in his life travel to India?

A: No. [This surprised us as many channeled sources have claimed this to be so.]

Q: (L) Did he travel to Egypt and undergo an initiation in the Great Pyramid?

A: No. [This also was a surprise in contradiction to our expectations as it was part of the New Age dogma!]

Q: (L) He lived his entire life in Palestine? [I was somewhat incredulous!]

A: Near. In that general area. The Bible is not entirely accurate.

Q: (L) When Jesus attended the marriage at Cana, whose wedding was it?

A: Did not happen.

Q: (L) Did Jesus feed thousands of people with a few loaves and fishes?

A: No.

Q: (L) Are you saying that all the miracles of the Bible are myths?

A: Remember this is corrupted information altered after the fact for purposes of political and economic gain and control.

Q: (L) Tell us what Jesus really did.

A: He taught spiritual truths to those starving for them.

Q: (L) And what was the basis of these spiritual truths?

A: Channeled information from higher sources.

Q: (L) What is the truth that Jesus taught?

A: That all men are loved by the creator and are ONE with same.

Q: (L) Did he perform any miracles?

A: Some.

Q: (L) Can you tell us about one or two of them?

A: Healing.

Q: (L) Was he able to literally heal with the touch of his hand?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Did he perform exorcisms?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Is Reiki the method he used to heal, or something similar?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Is there any way to enhance the Reiki energy to make it powerful enough that one could do in a very short time what now takes quite a while? [As it seems apparent that Jesus did.]

A: Yes.

Q: (L) What can one do to enhance the Reiki energy?

A: Attain lofty spiritual purity.

Q: (L) Are the only miracles he did healing?

A: No.

Q: (L) What other kinds of miracles did he do?

A: Telekinesis.

Q: (L) Did he walk on water?

A: No.

Q: (L) Did he turn water into wine?

A: No.

Q: (L) Are these all just stories?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) What is the purpose of the stories?

A: Control.

Q: (L) Was Jesus crucified?

A: No.

Q: (L) Was somebody crucified on a cross and represented to be Jesus?

A: No.

Q: There was no crucifixion and no resurrection after three days? Is that correct?

A: Close.

Q: (L) OK, what is the truth on that matter?

A: He spent 96 hours in a comatose state in a cave near Jerusalem. When he awoke, he prophesied to his disciples and then exited the cave. 27,000 people had assembled because of mothership appearance and he was taken up in a beam of light.

Q: (L) When did he go into this sleep state? Did he just go in one day and go to bed and go to sleep and then a ship came and picked him up?

A: Close.

Q: (L) So he appeared to his followers to have died?

A: They thought this.

Q: (L) Did he get up and say anything to anybody before he left on the ship?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Did he come back to life … so to speak?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) And then he told them things he had seen in his extended meditative sleep, is that what happened?

A: Close.

Q: (L) OK, what happened?

A: Told prophecies then proclaimed eventual return.

Q: (L) Was this information he got during this period of “extended sleep?”

A: Yes.

Q: (L) How long was he asleep, or in this state of semi-death?

A: 96 hours.

Q: (L) And then, a ship arrived and took him away, is that correct?

A: Yes. Upon pillar of light.

Q: (L) Is there any special power or advantage in praying in the name of Jesus?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Well, if he didn’t die and release his spirit into the earth plane, how is this power conferred?

A: Prayers go to him.

Q: (L) And what does he do when he hears the prayers?

A: Determines their necessity against background of individual soul development.

Q: (L) You say that when a person prays to Jesus that he makes some sort of a decision, is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Well, how can he do that when millions of people are praying to him simultaneously?

A: Soul division.

Q: (L) What do you mean by soul division?

A: Self-explanatory.

Q: (L) Do you mean soul division as in cellular meiosis where a cell splits and replicates itself?

A: No.

Q: (L) Does Jesus’ soul divide?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) How many times does it divide?

A: Endlessly as a projection of consciousness.

Q: (L) And what happens to this piece of soul that is divided or projected?

A: Is not a piece of a soul.

Q: (L) What is it?

A: It is a replication.

Q: (L) Is each replication exactly identical to the original?

A: Yes. And no.

Q: (L) In what way is the replicated soul different from the original?

A: Not able to give individual attention.

Q: (L) Are any of us able to replicate in this manner if we so desire?

A: Could if in same circumstance. The way the process works is thus: When Jesus left the earth plane, he went into another dimension or density of reality, whereupon all “rules” regarding the awareness of time and space are entirely different from the way they are perceived in your reality. A “time-warp cocoon,” if you will. At this point in space-time, his soul which was/is still in the physical realm, was placed in a state of something akin to suspended animation and a sort of advanced form of unconsciousness. From that point to the present his soul has been replicated from a state of this unconsciousness in order that all who call upon him or need to be with him or need to speak to him can do so on an individual basis. His soul can be replicated ad infinitum — as many times as needed. The replication process produces a state of hyper-consciousness in each and every version of the soul consciousness.

Q: (L) So, you are saying that Jesus is in a state of suspension, voluntarily, in another plane of existence, having chosen to give up his life on this plane in order to continuously generate replications of his soul pattern for other people to call upon for assistance? A sort of “template generator?”

A: Yes. Precisely.

Q: (L) If one calls upon him more than once, does one get a double dose?

A: Define.

Q: (L) If one repeatedly calls upon Jesus does one get repeated replications or additional strength, power or whatever?

A: No. Once one has truly made the connection, that’s all that’s needed.

Q: (L) This is an interesting concept. Has any other soul volunteered to perform this work?

A: Yes. 12 at the present “time.”

Q: (L) Can you name any of the others?

A: Buddha. Moses. Shintanhilmoon. Nagaillikiga. Others, varying degrees. Jesus is the strongest currently.

On the one hand, what the Cassiopaeans were saying about Jesus was comforting in that it explained a certain template availability that seemed to many to be very real, while at the same time returning the responsibility for soul evolution, or free will, to the individual; on the other hand, they were saying clearly and unequivocally that there was no crucifixion upon which salvation by grace was predicated.

Was Jesus crucified? Well, it is on this point that millions of people believe that they are “saved,” so it is a pretty big issue. The thing is, the fruits of this doctrine tend to demonstrate an exclusionary us-against-them mode of thinking that brings us back to the issue of free will — are we choosing because the choice is weighted, or the only good choice, or do we actually have free will?

As we have already noted, the idea of any “only way” a man can be saved is Nazi spirituality. Nevertheless, the explanation seemed to be that there certainly was an awesome event of some sort that followed a period of mysterious initiation and that this was the event that was later mythicized into the crucifixion story that followed the general lines of all the suffering savior religions of history. I didn’t know what to think about this.

It was not too long afterward that I came across the following passage in Manly Hall’s exhaustive compendium, The Secret Teachings of All Ages:

According to popular conception, Jesus was crucified during the thirty-third year of His life and in the third year of His ministry following his baptism. About AD 180, St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, one of the most eminent of the ante-Nicene theologians, wrote Against Heresies, an attack on the doctrines of the Gnostics. In this work, Irenaeus declared upon the authority of the Apostles themselves that Jesus lived to old age. To quote: “They, however, that they may establish their false opinion regarding that which is written … maintain that He preached for one year only, and then suffered in the twelfth month. [In speaking thus], they are forgetful of their own disadvantage, destroying His whole work, and robbing Him of that age which is both more necessary and more honourable than any other, that more advanced age, I mean, during which also as a teacher He excelled all others. For how could He have had His disciples, if He did not teach? And how could He have taught unless He had reached the age of a Master? For when He came to be baptised, He had not yet completed His thirtieth year, but was beginning to be about thirty years of age … and, (according to these men), He preached only one year reckoning from His baptism. On completing His thirtieth year He suffered, being in fact still a young man, and who had by no means attained to advanced age. Now, that the first stage of early life embraces thirty years, and that this extends onward to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but from the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which Our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as the Gospel and all the elders testify; those who were conversant in Asia with John, the disciple of the Lord, (affirming) that John conveyed to them that information. And He remained among them up to the time of Trajan. Some of them, moreover, saw not only John, but the other apostles also, and heard the very same account from them, and bear testimony as to the validity of the statement. Whom then should we rather believe? Whether such men as these or Ptolemaeus, who never saw the apostles, and who never even in his dreams attained to the slightest trace of an apostle?” [emphasis added] (Hall 2003, 579—581)

Well, obviously, this “Gospel” that Irenaeus refers to as testifying that Jesus did not suffer and die has disappeared! But,

… commenting on the foregoing passage of Irenaeus, [theologian] Godfrey Higgins remarks that it has fortunately escaped the hands of those destroyers who have attempted to render the Gospel narratives consistent by deleting all such statements. He also notes that the doctrine of the crucifixion was a vexata questio among Christians even during the second century. “The evidence of Irenaeus,” he says, “cannot be touched. On every principle of sound criticism, and of the doctrine of probabilities, it is unimpeachable.” (Hall 2003, 581)

Manly Hall adds these remarks:

It should further be noted that Irenaeus prepared this statement to contradict another apparently current in his time to the effect that the ministry of Jesus lasted but one year. Of all the early Fathers, Irenaeus, writing within eighty years after the death of St. John the Evangelist, should have had reasonably accurate information. If the disciples themselves related that Jesus lived to advanced age in the body, why has the mysterious number 33 been arbitrarily chosen to symbolize the duration of his life? Were the incidents in the life of Jesus purposely altered so that His actions would fit more closely into the pattern established by the numerous Savior-Gods who preceded him? (Hall 2003, 581)

Aside from the issues of what the Cassiopaeans had said about Jesus — and this confirmation by no less than one of the early church fathers, St. Irenaeus — here is one of our mysteries, the number 33, making an appearance right in the Bible. But that was only the first of many. Manly Hall discusses the issue of numbers and secret ciphers:

The use of ciphers has long been recognized as indispensable in military and diplomatic circles, but the modern world has overlooked the important role played by cryptography in literature and philosophy.

If the art of deciphering cryptograms could be made popular, it would result in the discovery of much hitherto unsuspected wisdom possessed by both ancient and medieval philosophers. It would prove that many apparently verbose and rambling authors were wordy for the sake of concealing words. Ciphers are hidden in the most subtle manner: they may be concealed in the watermark of the paper upon which a book is printed; they may be bound into the covers of ancient books; they may be hidden under imperfect pagination; they may be extracted from the first letters of words or the first words of sentences; they may be artfully concealed in mathematical equations or in apparently unintelligible characters; they may be extracted from the jargon of clowns or revealed by heat as having been written in sympathetic ink; they may be word ciphers, letter ciphers, or apparently ambiguous statements whose meaning could be understood only by repeated careful readings; they may be discovered in the elaborately illuminated initial letters of early books or they may be revealed by a process of counting words or letters. If those interested in Freemason research would give serious consideration to this subject, they might find in books and manuscripts of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the information necessary to bridge the gap in Masonic history that now exists between the Mysteries of the ancient world and the Craft Masonry of the last three centuries.

The arcana of the ancient Mysteries were never revealed to the profane except through the media of symbols. Symbolism fulfilled the dual office of concealing the sacred truths from the uninitiated and revealing them to those qualified to understand the symbols. Forms are the symbols of formless divine principles; symbolism is the language of Nature. With reverence the wise pierce the veil and with clearer vision contemplate the reality; but the ignorant, unable to distinguish between the false and the true, behold a universe of symbols. It may well be said of Nature — the Great Mother — that she is ever tracing strange characters upon the surface of things, but only to her eldest and wisest sons as a reward for their faith and devotion does she reveal the cryptic alphabet, which is the key to the import of these tracings.

… Only recently an intricate cipher of Roger Bacon’s has been unraveled, revealing the fact that this early scientist was well versed in the cellular theory. Lecturing before the American Philosophical Society, Dr. William Romaine Newbold, who translated the cipher manuscript of the friar, declared: “There are drawings which so accurately portray the actual appearance of certain objects that it is difficult to resist the inference that Bacon had seen them with the microscope. … These are spermatozoa, the body cells and the seminiferous tubes, the ova, with their nuclei distinctly indicated. There are nine large drawings of which one at least bears considerable resemblance to a certain stage of development of a fertilized cell.” (See Review of Reviews, July, 1921)

… The most famous of all literal cryptograms is the famous biliteral cipher described by Sir Francis Bacon in his De Augmentis Scientiarum. Lord Bacon originated the system while still a young man residing in Paris. The biliteral cipher requires the use of two styles of type, one an ordinary face and the other specially cut. The differences between the two fonts are in many cases so minute that it requires a powerful magnifying glass to detect them. … Lord Bacon is believed to have had two Roman alphabets specially prepared in which the differences were so trivial that it is almost impossible for experts to distinguish them.

A careful inspection of the first four “Shakespeare” folios discloses the use throughout the volumes of several styles of type differing in minute but distinguishable details. It is possible that all the “Shakespeare” folios contain ciphers running through the text. These ciphers may have been added to the original plays, which are much longer in the folios than in the original quartos, full scenes having been added in some instances.

The biliteral cipher was not confined to the writings of Bacon and “Shakespeare,” however, but appears in many books published during Lord Bacon’s lifetime and for nearly a century after his death. In referring to the biliteral cipher, Lord Bacon terms it omnia per omnia. The cipher may run through an entire book and be placed therein at the time of printing without the knowledge of the original author, for it does not necessitate the changing of either words or punctuation. It is possible that this cipher was inserted for political purposes into many documents and volumes published during the seventeenth century. It is well known that ciphers were used for the same reason as early as the Council of Nicea.

… Many cryptograms have been produced in which numbers in various sequences are substituted for letters, words, or even complete thoughts. The reading of numerical ciphers usually depends upon the possession of specially arranged tables of correspondences. The numerical cryptograms of the Old Testament are so complicated that only a few scholars versed in rabbinical lore have ever sought to unravel their mysteries. …

The most simple numerical cipher is that in which the letters of the alphabet are exchanged for numbers in ordinary sequence …

Authors sometimes based their cryptograms upon the numerical value of their own names; for example, Sir Francis Bacon repeatedly used the cryptic number 33 — the numerical equivalent of his name. (Hall 2003, 552—557, 561—562)

Somewhere along the way I read that all of the manuscripts of the different books of the Bible that were being translated under the patronage of King James were deposited into the care of Sir Francis Bacon by the many translators involved in the project. Apparently he had them in his possession for a year, but there are no reports as to what he was doing with them. It was suggested that the fact that Jesus went from age 30, when he began his ministry of one year, to the age of 33 at his crucifixion at the end of this one year, was a signature of Lord Bacon. It would sure be interesting to have an original copy of the first edition of the King James Version of the Bible to peruse for possible coded information!

Later I came across the suggestion that the coded signature of Lord Bacon in the New Testament was evidence that there was a Masonic conspiracy involved in the production of the Jesus myth. Bacon was also thought to have been in on the formation of the Rosicrucians, and others suggested that he had died the “philosopher’s death.” That is to say that he achieved the Great Work of alchemy which bestows upon its successful students the gift of immortality, and that a log or box of rocks was buried in his place. Supposedly, those who fake their deaths in this manner leave some sort of clue as to what really happened, and the clue that Lord Bacon had achieved the great work was in the fact that he died from eating a spoiled rooster — the rooster being an ancient symbol of alchemy.

After the “funeral,” the new Master Alchemist, who now has supernatural powers, takes his place among the order of those who have already ascended into this new state of being, and can thereafter appear and disappear at will to those who are ready to receive deeper instruction, having proved themselves worthy by their labor, will and intent.

All of this was very interesting to me, and I read and reread books on alchemy, theories about the supposed ciphers encoded in the works of Shakespeare, purported to be a pseudonym for either Lord Bacon himself, or a cabal of alchemists whose project was to preserve their secrets for subsequent generations to decode.

In the meantime, I read many works, both pro and con, about the Masonic conspiracies to take over the world and how the number 33 repeatedly appears whenever they have a hand in something. It was suggested that even the death of JFK was part of the Masonic plan to rule the world — or, at the very least, control it from behind the scenes — and everywhere I looked there were folks making this or that wild claim or conjecture about the repeated appearance of the number 33.

In the present time we have the claims of David Icke that the death of Princess Diana was a Masonic sacrifice, and that all of the members of European nobility are secret Masons and shapeshifting Reptilian beings with bloody appetites. Meanwhile, the Masons and Shriners build children’s hospitals, do good works in general, and there are few people who don’t have a Mason or two in the family tree, including yours truly.

Well, with all the confusion, with all the “proofs” going one way and another, it was difficult to sort it all out and decide just “who was on first” here! No sooner would I become convinced that the Masons were the most evil bunch on the planet, with designs on the freedoms of everyone, than I would come across an article or book that claimed exactly the opposite with exactly as much proof. Somewhere along the way I came across a pamphlet that claimed that the New Testament was written by a “rich and powerful aristocratic Roman family, the Calpurnius Pisos,” and that all the books therein were written between the years 70 and 140 ce. This pamphlet claimed that there was an “inner circle” of those who knew this and that the group included “Boccaccio, Bacon AKA Shakespeare, Cervantes, Rabelais, Tolstoy, Milton, Spenser, Tennyson, Thackeray, Kipling, Stevenson, Poe, Oleson, Browning, Noyes, Lewis Carroll, A. Conan Doyle, Verne, Baum, Tolkien, ad infinitum.”

I have to admit that their evidence was very compelling. One thing that this pamphlet demonstrated was that the number 22 was the code for “Christos” and the number 19 was the code for “Piso.” The number 24, by their interpretation, was the code for “Jesus.” Whoever these folks were, they were seeing coded messages in everything from steamship ads to Dick Tracy cartoon strips!

Around this point in time, a friend had picked up a book in a used bookstall at a flea market and, knowing of my interests in anything that was about ancient mysteries, especially the Flood of Noah, brought the book over to me. It was entitled Lost Survivors of the Deluge, by Gerd von Hassler and translated from the German by Martin Ebon. You sure wouldn’t expect to find anything about Jesus in there, now would you? But, we need to remember the reputed remark of Jesus that the end of the age would be “as in the days of Noah,” so somehow, the two things were intertwined in my mind. As I was just reading along, I came to the following passage and the hair on my head began to stand on end:

In the Bible it says: “And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the Sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be but a hundred and twenty years.” With this Divine dictum, the golden times, when gods and their direct offspring lived to be 900 years old, and more, came to an end.

For hundreds of years, these lines have troubled religious scholars, because direct and literal translations specifically yields the term “Sons of God,” as pursuing human maidens. Accordingly, some 2,000 years were devoted to many an inspired and convoluted explanation, in order to come to terms with a notion that fits neither the concepts of the Bible, nor that of a heavenly Divine Creator, but had to be given an appropriate interpretation.

This is a fact [since the Deluge] we have lost godlike Near-Immortality and all the efforts to intensify the quality of the divine blood through incest — as both the Inca Emperors and the Pharaohs attempted — had to fail. … The Divine Blood had been diluted. But God had desired the equality of the divine with the human. The Bible tells us:

“And God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness …”

“Let us make man in our image” is but one of the somewhat dictatorial decisions of democratic majorities within a family of gods, to be found in all the world’s myths.

This brings us to the crucial question. It is, indeed, so vital and controversial that St. Boniface, when he presented it to the Frisians during his missionary journey on June 5, 754, was put to death by the sword! Today, we may ask such a question without facing the sword; it is: Just what is the name of the God—Creator? What is the name of the god who governed the earth even before the Deluge; this God of Gods, rightly called Father of the Gods, and thus Father of all Mankind?

To put it even more simply: If a highly-developed civilization existed more than 10,000 years ago, governing the world’s then-populated regions, and if the God—King was able to aid his contemporaries in surviving the Deluge catastrophe, surely the name of this ruler must have been handed down to later generations of survivors; who was he?

We know from the Epic of Gilgamesh, of the horrible Enlil, who was responsible for the Deluge. The other gods did not think highly of him, but feared him a good deal. His influence never extended beyond Mesopotamia. His antagonist, Shamash, the Sun God, enjoyed greater prestige. He remains, notably in Asia even today, a figure of magical power, the epitome of the shaman.

But even the early Egyptians called their Sun God by a different name, Ra. This need not mean much, because Plato tells us that the Egyptians had even then developed a unique and high level of civilization hostile toward the unknown earlier culture.

The Egyptian term ‘Ra’ was integrated into the language of early Peru, where we encounter the annual sun festival Rami or Raymi. But this adaptation undoubtedly dates back only to the period following the Deluge, as does the word ‘Wotan.’

This enables us to draw a firm dividing line: we are able to eliminate all gods who emerged from the post-Deluge civilizations as creators of cultures, builders of cities, magicians or agronomists. The ONE God for whom we search has to be the father — or even ancestor — of this post-Deluge generation of gods. Just as Tuisto, father of Mannus, was the ancestor of Germanic culture.

Tuisto? Can that be accurate? Or did Tacitus fail to understand the name correctly? The curious linking of the darkest and lightest vowel in our language brings back a curious association.

Of course! It is Tiu, the god whom the early Germans recalled when they made up the calendar and named one day of the week after him: Tuesday. Otherwise, he has been overshadowed by the ever-present Wotan-Odin, as the highest Ruler of the Heavens.

This replacement took place, at the latest, during the Volkerwanderung, the Great Migration that caused a gigantic upheaval of populations on the Eurasian land mass. We may even assume that, just because Tiu (or Ziu) was removed heavenward, the very vigorous Wotan managed to take his place in human imagination and thought. It was a fate that Wotan experienced himself later on, when missionaries cut down the very oaks that had been dedicated to his divine presence.

Tiu-Ziu was just as much one of the Aesir as Wotan had been. And the Aesir had even managed to infiltrate the antagonist worlds of Egypt and Mesopotamia, representing the sun and divine wisdom. … I do think, however, that our search for the original name of the primal Creator-God should not get bogged down in such minute details. The survivors of the Deluge of whom we learn from the Bible and the earlier Gilgamesh Epic and other traditions, were themselves survivors of the earlier world of gods. … Over thousands of years, they passed on a handful of names. No doubt, precisely how much and what one name or another had originally meant may simply have been forgotten over the long, long years.

If we concentrate on the godlike of God Ziu, we discover the following points:

â–ºZius was the highest god of northern Europe

â–ºAs Zeus, he was the highest god of ancient Greece

â–ºAs Jupiter (Iu-Pitar = Tius-Pater) he was the Father God of ancient Rome

â–ºAs Deus (from which we derive ‘Deity’) he was the basic concept of the heavenly, the only Deity in the Latin liturgy of the Church, and the God in all Romance languages, as well as in the word ‘theology.’

â–ºAs Ometeotle (again, ‘theology’ is closely related) he was the highest god of the Mayan culture.

â–ºAs Cinteotl and God of Corn he is equivalent to Quetzalcoatl, the white god.

â–ºAs Tonatiuh, he was the Sun God, who provided the Aztecs with a sort of Valhalla for their war dead.

â–ºAs Xiuhtecutli, he was the Fire God of ancient Mexico.

â–ºAs Tirawa-Atius, the highest divinity of the Pawnee, he was credited with populating the world with ‘giants.’

â–ºAs Tieholtsodi, the monster who caused the Deluge and ruled all waters, he exists in the traditions of the Navajos

â–ºAs Szeu-kha, he is the son of the Creator-God whom the Pima Indians knew as floating above the Deluge

â–ºAs the falcon Tiuh-Tiuh of the Guatemaltec Indians he mixed the blood of a snake with that of a tapir, kneaded it with corn-flour and ‘thus created the flesh of man.’ This tribe says that it came from Tulan, the Place of the Sun, across the sea.

All of this narrows down to one conclusion — which nevertheless is not definitive — and that is: our old Tuesday God, Tiu, was a divine Ruler-God in primeval times and his name imprinted itself so deeply into human memory that it has survived thousands upon thousands of years. [emphasis added] (Von Hassler 1976)

What was the name the Cassiopaeans gave to the real man behind the Jesus myth? Tonatha. Amazingly similar to Tonatiuh. At the very moment that I encountered this little clue, I was contemplating the evidence as to whether or not alchemists were able to actually achieve the Great Work and immortality and how this might relate to Jesus. And so, the question that emerged from that study was whether or not the Cassiopaeans had given us a clue — in this alleged real name of Jesus — to an actual sect that had members who might be thousands of years old. Now that I had found this strange collection of the names of god, I began to wonder if, by giving us this name, the Cassiopaeans were telling us that such an immortal was the actual biological father of Jesus?

What this amounted to was an interesting thread relating to the “bloodline” of Jesus. Where will it ultimately lead? Who and what was this “Tonatha” who bears one of the oldest names of God?

Let me point out that this particular bit of information from the Cassiopaeans — this name, of which we were completely ignorant at the time — later connected to information that went back into the mists before recorded history. Yes, it is true that this was information that was known in some circles before we received it (or Von Hassler wouldn’t have been writing about it), but it was definitely unknown to us in any way.

Does this prove that the Cassiopaeans are actually who and what they say they are? No. But, if nothing else, it demonstrates a connection to some source, even if only the universal consciousness or “akashic records.”

Meanwhile, we were given some clues in another direction that ended up connecting to all of this in a bizarre way, so we have to pause and go in another direction for a moment. (I warned you this was going to be complicated!) I first heard about Oak Island when I was just a kid. My grandfather subscribed to several magazines, one of which (I think it was Argosy) published an article on the Oak Island mystery. I was completely fascinated by this account and it stayed in the back of my mind for many years.

After the Cassiopaeans came along, I was like a kid in a candy store. It was fun to go through my many books and just ask question after question about all the things that were mysterious in our world. In a sense, it was a sort of test just to see what they would say about these things, and I had no particular attachment to their remarks because, in many cases, there was no way to validate them. In terms of these mysteries, one theory was about as good as another. I was initially just curious to get a lot of material to analyze later, so I was jumping through things in a quick and haphazard way. I didn’t know what an editing headache I was creating for myself. Heck, I had no idea what an impact the Cassiopaeans were going to have on my life! We didn’t even record the first half dozen or so sessions because we didn’t think it was that important!

But, before we get to the Cassiopaean comments on the Oak Island Mystery, I believe it would be useful to briefly recapitulate what is presently known about it.

The Oak Island Mystery

Oak Island is situated off the coast of Nova Scotia, and it is thought that the name of the island relates to the many oak trees that formerly dotted the small speck of land. There are a couple of residents who have built homes there, and in recent times, a causeway was built which effectively makes it no longer an island, but a peninsula.1

As is the case with other legends, there are a number of apocryphal versions of the discovery on Oak Island. One version of the story tells us that, in 1795, a few young lads rowed over to the island to explore as part of an adventure game or on a dare. They were attracted to the mystery of the island because it was claimed by the local Indians to be haunted, due to the fact that strange lights had reportedly been seen there.

Knowing how such stories get told and retold, it is likely that the island was considered to be haunted by the locals, and dangerously so. A Chester woman whose mother had been one of the earliest settlers reported that once when the fires and lights had been observed, a boatload of men who had gone to investigate had disappeared without a trace. This is quite similar to urban myths of today.

Whatever version of the story is told, the names of the three boys were Daniel McGinnis, John Smith, and Anthony Vaughn. As to what the boys “discovered,” again there are some variations. It was a large oak tree with either a large ship’s pulley hanging from an overhanging branch, or the “burn marks” on the branch that looked as though a heavy load had been suspended from a rope at that point. Details about the vegetation either being cleared away, or new growth in an area under and around the tree occur in different versions.

The boys apparently decided that they had discovered where pirates had buried treasure, so they went off to fetch digging tools to recover whatever must be buried there. They dug a circular shaft 13 feet in diameter and, according to the basic story found strange things — barriers — at various levels: at 4 feet, flagstones; at 10 feet, a platform of solid oak; at 20 feet another oak platform, and at 30 feet, still another oak platform.

Obviously, three boys weren’t going to dig that much. Apparently, after the initial discoveries that something mysterious was indeed indicated, they had sought help from some men of the community. But it was all in vain because the hole suddenly filled with water just at the point when they thought they were going to get to the treasure. Nine years went by. In 1804, Simeon Lynds formed a treasure hunting syndicate and digging resumed. At 40 feet, another layer of Oak covered with putty was found. Then there was a layer of charcoal. At 50 feet there was another oak platform sealed with coconut fiber. At 60, 70 and 80 feet, oak platforms; at 90 feet, a flat stone was reportedly found that measured 3 x 1 feet. The stone was said to not be native to the areas and had strange markings on it.

The story about the stone is rather confusing. It was said to have been installed at the back of a fireplace for a number of years. It was later “recovered” and exhibited to raise money for more digging. A professor of languages claimed to have cracked the code and translated the markings to say “10 feet below, 2 million pounds.” Someone else who saw the stone in the early years of this century remembered that when he saw it, there were no strange markings. It seems to have disappeared.

At 98 feet, water began to pour in, apparently channeled to the pit through a series of stone-lined, coconut fiber-filled conduits that act as wicks. In 1849, a new syndicate was formed that bored 5 holes. They found that at the 98-foot level, there was a spruce platform 5 inches thick. This was followed by a 12-inch space, then 4 inches of oak, and then 22 inches of drilling brought up bits of metal. Also retrieved were 3 metal links of a chain.

Following that event, which excited the drillers because it was claimed that the chain was gold and looked ancient (though I have never read an account by anyone who had actually seen it — it was always hearsay), the drillers kept going and encountered 8 inches of oak, another 22 inches of metal; 4 inches of oak; 6 inches of spruce; then 7 feet of clay and nothing else. At one point, it was reported that a James Pitblado found and pocketed something off the drill, but there is no firm idea as to whether this really happened, and if so, what the item was.

In 1859, another attempt was made. This was when the conduits were discovered that repeatedly filled the pit with water. The discovery of the flood tunnels convinced this horde of idiots that there was a fabulous treasure. They reasoned that it was inconceivable that anyone would go to that much trouble to conceal ordinary treasure! Of course, the more logical reason would be to think that it was never meant to be dug up and therefore, could not be treasure.

In 1865, still another attempt. This gang tunneled beside the original shaft, into it sideways, built a dam against the water, and so forth. Failure.

In 1894, a new gang dynamited the flood tunnel. They lowered a pipe into the pit and at 126 feet, they struck iron. They drilled past the obstruction and, at 151 feet, hit cement! Drilling further, after 2 more inches, they encountered 5 inches of oak and then “large metal objects,” then “loose metal,” and then more “large metal objects.”

Sounds to me like there was some kind of big machine buried down there and they were just tearing it apart with their drills. There were attempts in 1931, and in 1963, a hole 80 feet wide and 130 feet deep was dug. Nothing.

In the 1990s, a submarine TV camera revealed what looked like three chests and a severed hand. Divers were lowered to a depth of 235 feet, but found nothing. A good question to ask here is: what would a severed hand be doing down there? The bodies of the several people who have died during the 200 years of attempts to excavate this pit were all completely recovered. In any event, the lighting of the film was bad; there was nothing to provide scale. What was seen as a chest could have been a piece of wood a few inches square. The only thing this film did was more or less prove that there was a pit of some kind, but whether or not it existed prior to all the digging, it’s hard to say.

Now, what seems to me to be the obvious questions are: why would someone who buries a treasure leave such things as a marker stone, or a depression in the ground, marks on a tree, and other obvious signs of concealing said treasure? Doesn’t make a lot of sense, does it?

All the stories, legends, assumptions, beliefs and wishful thinking have been generated by treasure hunters who have an agenda: to get money to dig to get more money. Then, there are the folks who have linked this mystery to the Legends of the Holy Grail, the Ark of the Covenant, and so on. There are no artifacts in existence that have been validated reliably, and the site itself has been so obliterated by greed that no self-respecting archaeologist would even dream of attempting to sort out the mess.

With all the books and articles and supposed investigations, there is a dark shadow of greed and avarice hiding the facts of the matter. We can wishfully think all we want, but that doesn’t make a story true — as it is told, that is. And that is the crux of the matter. Where there is smoke, there is likely to be some fire, even if only a little. And, there are real questions about Oak Island that beg answers.

The first question is, naturally, was there ever a mystery to begin with? Since there exists no hard evidence of a pit on Oak Island before a newspaper article in 1862, can we rely on this first reportage as being even remotely accurate? One assumes, of course, that there was some sort of evidence to justify the article, and that it was checked.

If the initial discovery took place in 1795, that means 67 years had passed before the telling. As we review the story, we see that an awful lot of effort was claimed to have been exerted during that 67 years.

In considering the story about the boys who made the discovery, 67 years is not too long for there to be people with living memory of the events able to tell about it, so we can’t discard it on that account.

A major effort was claimed to have been undertaken in 1859, three years before the subject was publicized, and it seems that the 1865 and 1894 efforts would not have been attempted if there was not some evidence on the ground, so to say, that something was there.

Thus it seems, based on this last consideration, that there is a good probability that there is something to the story. So, let’s move on to the next questions.

If there was an original pit, as described, who dug it? Who had the capabilities to dig it? Was it a storage chamber? If so, what was stored in it? If it was not a storage chamber, what other explanations can there be for the apparent original disturbance of the landscape? How, at this late date, would it be possible to sort through all the lies and confusion?

How do we explain the burn marks or pulley on the tree and the cannon shot reportedly found during the original dig? Is this evidence of pirates and treasure? Or an ammo dump? But, if it was that, why go to such extreme measures to make the materials almost impossible to access in a rapid manner? That doesn’t make sense. And, if it was a practical joke perpetrated by some young boys, it is certainly one of the most elaborate and long-lived pranks in history!

We find ourselves in the presence of a very great mystery that has defied two hundred years of brawn and brain to solve. Now, with so great a host of words already spent on the subject, notwithstanding that the mystery has never been solved in any concrete and verifiable way, what more could I add to the matter without further muddying the waters? I can only add the Cassiopaean commentary, and many things that were learned as a result of these clues.

The first time we discussed the Oak Island mystery with the Cassiopaeans, it actually was a sort of afterthought question to a somewhat similar mystery. I had just read an account in an old Fate magazine that goes as follows: “Hidden deep within a Czech mountain is an ancient shaft and tower seemingly built by advanced technology but older than the bones of extinct beasts …”

The author, Antonin T. Horak, wrote down the cave exploration adventure of a member of the Czech resistance, which occurred in October of 1944, during WWII. Mr. Horak stated that the account was confirmed by friends of his in Czechoslovakia in 1965. The story was first printed in the March 1965 issue of National Speleological Society in an attempt to interest other speleologists in mounting an expedition. The captain of the Slovak Resistance who told the story for the speleology magazine was apparently hidden in this cave, along with a companion who was wounded, by a farmer near the villages of Plavince and Lubocna at 49.2 N 20.7 degrees E. The farmer’s name was Slavek.

Slavek moved rocks in the cranny and opened a low cleft, the entrance to this roomy grotto. Placing Martin (the wounded companion) in a niche, we were astonished to see Slavek become ceremonious: he crossed himself, each of us, the grotto, and with a deep bow, its back wall where a hole came to my attention. … Slavek begged me not to go further into his cave. … He told me that only once, with his father and grandfather, had he been in this cave; that it was a huge maze, full of pits which they never wanted to fathom, pockets of poisonous air and ‘certainly haunted.’

Well, needless to say, our captain was very curious and decided to investigate the cave that could make an illiterate farmer so superstitious.

I started my cave tour with rifle, lantern, torches, pick. After a not too devious nor dangerous walk and some squeezings, always taking the easiest and marking side passages, I came, after about one and one-half hours into a long level passage, and at its end a barrel sized hole. Crawling through and still kneeling, I froze in amazement. There stood something like a large, black silo, framed in white. … I thought that this is a bizarre natural wall or curtain of black salt, or ice, or lava. But I became perplexed, then awestruck, when I saw that it was a seemingly manmade structure which reaches into the rocks on all sides.

Beautifully, cylindrically curved, it indicated a huge body with a diameter of about 25 meters. Where this structure and the rocks meet, large stalagmites and stalactites formed that glittering white frame.

The wall is uniformly blue-blackish; its material seems to combine properties of steel, flint, and rubber. The pick made no marks and bounced off vigorously.

Even the thought of a tower-sized artifact embedded in rock in the middle of an obscure mountain, in a wild region where not even legend knows about ruins or mining industry, overgrown with age-old cave deposits, is bewildering. The fact is appalling.

Not immediately discernible, a crack in the wall appears from below about 20 to 25 cm wide, tapers off and disappears into the cave’s ceiling two to five cm wide. Its insides, right and left, are pitch black and have fist-sized, sharp valleys and crests. The crack’s bottom is a rather smooth trough of yellow sandstone and drops very steeply into the wall.

I threw a lighted torch through; it fell and extinguished with loud cracklings and hissings as if a white-hot ploughshare were dropped into a bucket. Driven to explore and believing myself thin enough to get through this upside down keyhole, I went in.

He got stuck and had to get himself unstuck, and so he gave up and went back to his companion. Returning on Oct. 24, 1944, (the notes are from a journal) the Captain tried to get through again. He took off all his clothes and covered himself with sheep fat and managed, after some difficulty, to get inside the tower. He found himself in a curved black shaft.

The Captain had come with plenty of lights — torches, lanterns etc. — and said that all the light together did not reach the ceiling. According to the journal, he leaves and comes back the next day, smears himself with sheep fat again, and goes back through the crack.

At this visit, the Captain started shooting his gun upward which nearly blew his eardrums out because of the acoustics, but he didn’t hear an impact. Then, he fired at the walls themselves, somewhat above, and noted blue-green sparks and dancing flames. He started digging in the floor and found fossilized animal teeth.

Returning again, on October 26, the Captain took a pole to make the lantern go higher, but still was not able to see the ceiling. At this point, his companion died, and he was free to rejoin his unit and that was the end of the story.

Needless to say, this tidbit about an artificial structure made out of unknown material, that was so old a mountain had “grown” around it really piqued my curiosity. Who or what in the world, could be responsible for such a thing? So, I asked:

Q: (L) In one of my Fate magazines over there I read a story about a fellow who discovered an enormous structure in a cave when he was hiding there during WWII. A shaft in the Tatra Mountains in Czechoslovakia. What was this thing this man found in this cave?

A: Magnesium wall made by Lizard beings. Constructed 309,448 years ago. It was part of a base. It was buried during cataclysms.

Well, that answered that! Couldn’t be verified, for sure, but, the word “buried” triggered a thought about my recent reading about Oak Island, so why not just settle this whole Oak Island thing at once? I didn’t have to believe what the Cs said about it, but since nobody else really had a good explanation, another one wouldn’t hurt. I didn’t know that I was getting ready to open a can of worms!

Q: (L) What is buried on Oak Island?

A: Regenerator.

Q: (L) What is a regenerator?

A: Remolecularizer.

Q: (L) Who put it there?

A: Lizard beings.

Q: (L) When did they put it there?

A: 10,000 years ago, approximately.

Q: (L) Do they use it from time to time?

A: No. [We didn’t ask if anyone else used it.]

Q: (L) Does it still work?

A: It could.

Q: (T) What is the purpose of a remolecularizer?

A: Regenerate matter.

Q: (L) Such as physical bodies?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) So, you just go and stand next to it or inside it or whatever and it regenerates you?

A: Any matter.

Q: (L) Well, that would be a really handy thing to have in the barn. Is there any way to get it out of there?

A: Maybe. Are you planning an expedition?

Q: (L) No, we’re just being nosy. How deep is it buried?

A: Deep.

Q: (T) Well, we can send it in to a treasure hunter’s magazine and give somebody an idea of how far they have to go. (L) Yeah, tell them what it is and they will go whole hog for it. (T) Yeah. It’s a regenerator. “What?” Well, it’s a remolecularizer. What’s wrong with you? Where have you been? You never wanted to be regenerated? You, too, can be a Time Lord! (L) Amaze your friends, confound your enemies, you can hypnotize any woman from a distance by the power of your … [Chorus] Regenerator! (T) Wow! Look at the size of his Regenerator! [Much laughter] Thank you.

A: Good Night.

As you can see, it was late and we were all getting a little silly. Little did we know that this was going to get serious!

A few months later, I was reading over the above text and decided I wanted to ask a bit more about it. The Cs had already talked about Transdimensional Atomic Remolecularization as the mode of time travel and the technology used for moving between densities and dimensions. They had mentioned that remolecularization was the mode of assembly of third density matter from fourth density and higher “thought” transduced via the effects of supernovae. So, I just assumed that TDARM was also what was buried at Oak Island:

Q: (L) When I was reading our little bit about Oak Island the other day, I noticed that we never followed up on certain things. Could we ask on that now?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) OK, you said at that time that a Transdimensional Atomic Remolecularizer was buried at Oak Island. Is that correct?

A: Yes. [So, my assumption was on target.]

Q: (L) Who buried it there?

A: Learn. [Note that they had previously answered that the Lizard Beings did, but now were suggesting that there was more to this issue than met the eye.]

Q: (L) Well, we are getting ready to learn because you are going to teach us, is that correct?

A: You already have tools.

Q: (L) What do you mean we already have tools?

A: We are trying to teach you to use your most precious commodity.

Q: (L) And that is, of course, our minds?

A: You betcha!

We were, for the first time, facing questions that we had to investigate on our own. As time has gone by, I have learned that this type of question — ones that we have to figure out — seem to be related to our “destined” mission. That may be only my own assumption and may have no basis in fact, but as the clues begin to fit together, the reader can make his or her own assessment.

I did some more reading on the subject of Oak Island in order to discover if there was any way that what the Cassiopaeans were saying could be true. The more I read from different sources, the more confused I got. There were lies, manipulations, corruption of information and artifacts, and evidence of incredible greed on all sides of this story. Seems that everybody who had anything to do with it was sure that there was a ton of money buried there and they would do about anything to be the one to dig it up. The result was a complete mess. I decided that I was never going to make any sense out of this Oak Island business.

Q: (L) OK. What I read about Oak Island was that there were legends of lights being seen there prior to 1703. [Remember that 1795 is when the boys rowed to the island and discovered the rope marks on the sawed off tree limb and the depression in the ground.]

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Prior to 1703 would put the burial of whatever is there at least prior to that time. Were those lights that were seen and reported by the local natives the lights of craft of other beings other than the humans of this planet?

A: Electromagnetic profile.

Q: (L) The thing that was noticed when the kids who discovered the pit first visited the Island in 1795, was that a limb was sawed off of a tree over the depression and there were marks of a rope as though pulleys had been utilized. (T) If someone more advanced than humans dug the pit, they wouldn’t have used chain hoists and pulleys. (L) That is what I am getting at. So, if there was evidence of this kind of stuff on the tree, it would seem to indicate that somebody had been doing something there who was a little more human or limited in their technology, is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) At the same time, my thought is that, it is beyond human technology to have produced that pit at that point in history. That’s pretty evident from the diagrams of the structure.

A: Beyond known technology.

Q: (L) And yet humans may have been involved in digging something up from the evidence of the pulley activity.

A: Bingo. Some humans have always communed with “higher” powers. We are speaking of conscious communion in this and other instances.

Q: (L) OK, there was conscious communion between humans and other powers in the building of this pit. What group of humans was this?

A: It’s fun to learn.

Q: (J) How about pirates?

A: No.

Q: (L) Indians?

A: Keep going, network.

Q: (L) There were the French and the English. How about the Vikings? (F) No, the Vikings were 600 years before that. (T) Well, we don’t know how long ago the apparent pit was dug. (L) When was the pit dug that relates directly to the rope burns on the tree?

A: 1500s. Nationality is not issue.

Q: (T) Well, this remolecularizer was dug up sometime in the middle of the 1500s. Somebody was told to dig there by higher powers.

A: Access sect information.

Q: (L) So, it could have been a religious group.

A: Now, who claimed communion, Laura has in memory banks from absorption of mass reading practice.

I had to admit that I was drawing a blank. I just couldn’t think of any “sect” that was wandering around in North America in the 1500s that would have that kind of conscious communion with higher powers. Notice that the term “higher powers” was placed in quotes by the Cs, and they also said originally that the device was buried by “Lizard beings.” The same origin was given for the magnesium wall in Europe. My suggestion that humans may have been involved in digging something up from the pit was met with an affirmative answer, and it was this group that we were now discussing, not necessarily the group that buried the thing.

The question then is: are we looking for a group claiming communion that are wearing “white hats,” or “black hats?” Was the item buried by Lizard beings after being stolen? Or did it belong to them? It seemed to me that there was a clear distinction between those who buried something on Oak Island and those who were digging there in the 1500s. Or maybe not.

Q: (F) Was there a sect from that era that claimed communion?

A: Yes.

Q: [At this point I was really shooting in the dark.] (L) Maybe it had something to do with the people that later became known as the Cajuns, a French religious sect that was living there … Acadians is what they were … and they called the area Acadia … Was it the Cajuns? [Meaning, of course, the French settlers who later became the Cajuns.]

A: Maybe. [Now, we know that “maybe” is only a “you’re getting warm but still off the mark” hint.]

Q: (L) Now, this article says that it would have taken a hundred men working every day for six months to dig this pit …

A: No.

Q: (L) The article also says that it must have been dug in 1780 … [This article did not take into account the reports of strange lights on the island prior to 1703.]

A: No.

Q: (L) When they drilled into the pit, some bits of gold came up and a piece of parchment and maybe some other odds and ends. What were these?

A: Alchemy.

With this answer, the Cs gave us the most important clue to many great mysteries, though we didn’t know it at the time. Whatever had been hidden there had something to do with alchemy, and if that was the case, did it mean that it had been stolen and concealed by “Lizard beings” and their cohorts, or did it belong to them in the first place? My guess was that if it belonged to them, there would be no need for them to hide it so thoroughly. The only reason I could think of for such actions was that whatever it was, it was something that they could not use — or destroy — for some reason, but wanted to prevent anyone else from using.

Q: (L) If these people were involved in doing this, why did they do it?

A: Instructed to do it.

Q: (L) They were instructed by the higher powers they were in contact with, correct?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) What did they intend to do with it? Did someone intend to come back for it at some point in time?

A: No.

Now, the most obvious question of all was not asked: If it had been buried there by Lizzies 10,000 years ago, and these guys were instructed about it, dug it up, and then reburied it, what did they dig it up to do with it in the 1500s? Or, did they fail to dig it up at all?

Q: (T) Is it buried there in that location for a specific reason?

A: Sure.

Q: (T) Does the location itself have something to do with the purpose of it?

A: Magnetic.

Q: (T) Are there other ones buried on the planet?

A: Yes.

Q: (T) Are they aligned to each other on the planet in some kind of geometric pattern?

A: Maybe.

Q: (T) Do they all work together?

A: Maybe.

Q: (J) Can you tell us where some of the other ones are?

A: Use mind. That is what it is there for.

Q: (T) We are using our minds. And, we are talking to you about this. We are friendly.

A: Shortcut city.

Q: (T) Yeah! That’s what it is all about. We are still third density! If we use …

A: It’s not nice to fool Mother Cassiopaea!

Q: [Laughter] (T) If we were to follow the coordinates where this thing is buried, would it lead us to others?

A: Try it and see.

Q: (L) OK. I want to get back to the function of this thing. You say it is buried not to be dug up. It is actually buried to stay there? Is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Then that explains a lot of things about the way it was buried. There was supposedly found, at a certain level, a rock with carving on it. It was destroyed through carelessness. I am curious as to what this said. Can you access this and tell us what it said?

A: Measure marker.

Q: (J) Could it be possible that this device was somehow related to the crystal pyramid of Atlantis?

A: In a small sense.

Q: (J) Did the pyramid have anything to do with powering this device?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Is this device continuously operational?

A: No.

Q: (L) What stimulates it to go into operation? That is, assuming it does.

A: Magnetic anomalies.

Q: (J) Is it affected by earthquakes?

A: Can be.

Q: (L) Are these magnetic anomalies ones that occur naturally on the planet?

A: Both.

Q: (L) So, they can occur naturally on the planet or they can be generated or stimulated by some other source?

A: Yes.

Q: (J) Is this device a doorway for entry into this dimension?

A: Can be used as such.

Q: (T) Is it a stand-alone machine or is it to be used in conjunction with others?

A: Either.

Q: (T) Are they positioned in such a way if something small happens only a couple of them kick in, but if something large happens, as many as necessary?

A: OK.

Q: (L) Who owns it? Who built it?

A: Answer for yourself, and enough, already, on this subject!!!!

Q: (J) I think I just heard a door slam!

Well, aside from the fact that I was asking a dumb question, considering that they had already told us that the Reptoids had built it and put it there originally, I guess you can see from our attempts to begin to learn to think — to really think — that it was a definite struggle. Working to get rid of assumptions and allow the creative thinking process to flow was a lot of work. But, not nearly as much work as I had ahead of me based on just a few clues.

In the end, the clues about “sect,” “Acadia” and “alchemy” and the time period of the 1500s that had been given were all I had to go on. So I hit the books again. I realized that just the normally available resources were not going to get me where I wanted to go, so I began to look for links to alchemy, and links to links. I made lists of names and dates and obscure references and began to follow them. There was a lot of material.

I obtained obscure alchemical texts full of strange coded messages and bizarre pictures that were supposed to reveal something to those who had the insight to understand. It apparently wasn’t me, and I struggled day after day to try to divine some meaning from these lunatic descriptions of experiments with sexual overtones, most of which proclaimed at the beginning that the truth was going to be given plainly!


Nowadays, our materialistic science derides alchemists as misguided mystics who followed a dream of discovering a substance that could transform base metals into gold. Yes, they admit that much scientific discovery was accomplished in these pursuits, but they toss out the objective of the alchemists as just a pipe dream.

Nevertheless, there are interesting stories there, some so deeply curious that the mind cannot grapple with the implications, and they are immediately discarded as too fantastic for serious consideration. I want to recount a few of them here so that the reader who is not familiar with the literature might be sufficiently intrigued to do research on his or her own.

But first, a short discussion of the Philosopher’s Stone. This is the goal of the alchemist; a fabled substance that can not only transmute metals into gold, but can heal any illness, banish all sickness from a person’s life, and confer an extended lifespan, if not immortality, on the body. At least, that is how it is described. That may or may not be a cover story. The stories of the Philosopher’s Stone may, in fact, describe the fourth density state of existence.

It was thought that, by a lengthy process of purification, one could extract from various minerals the natural principle that supposedly caused gold to “grow” in the earth. In an anonymous seventeenth century alchemical text, The Sophic Hydrolith, this process is described as “purging [the mineral] of all that is thick, nebulous, opaque and dark,” and what would be left would be a mercurial “water of the Sun,” which had a pleasant, penetrating odor, and was very volatile.

Part of this liquid is put aside, and the rest is then mixed with a twelfth of its weight of “the divinely endowed body of gold,” (ordinary gold won’t do because it is defiled by daily use). This mixture then forms a solid amalgam, which is heated for a week. It is then dissolved in some of the mercurial water in an egg-shaped phial. Then, the remaining mercurial water is added gradually, in seven portions; the phial is sealed, and kept at such a temperature as will hatch an egg.

After 40 days, the phial’s contents will be black; after seven more days, small grainy bodies like fish eyes are supposed to appear. Then the Philosopher’s Stone begins to make its appearance: first reddish in color; then white, green and yellow like a peacock’s tail; then dazzling white; and later a deep glowing red. Finally, “the revivified body is quickened, perfected and glorified” and appears in a beautiful purple.

This and many similarly obscure and crazy sounding texts are the bulk of alchemical literature. But, we have to remember one thing: these texts were written in code, the code of the Sybils. Remember, Mouravieff quoted St. Isaac the Syrian, saying that “esoteric teachings are given in a sibylline form”: “The Holy Scriptures say many things by using words in a different sense from their original meaning. Sometimes bodily attributes are applied to the soul, and conversely, attributes of the soul are applied to the body.” Manly Hall reproduces Dr. Sigismund Bacstrom’s commentary on the Emerald Table of Hermes:

By invigorating the Organs the Soul uses for communicating with exterior objects, the Soul must a acquire greater powers not only for conception but also for retention, and therefore if we wish to obtain still more knowledge, the organs and secret springs of physical life must be wonderfully strengthened and invigorated. The Soul must acquire new powers for conceiving and retaining … (Hall 2003, 515)

It seemed rather clear to me that these instructions had absolutely nothing to do with anything outside of the body, but what they did actually describe, I hadn’t a clue.

Nevertheless, I persisted in reading many texts of this kind and searching for clues there and in the stories of the alchemists themselves. It was in reading the anecdotes about so-called alchemists that I became convinced that there was, indeed, something very mysterious going on here. For example: In 1666, Johann Friedrich Schweitzer, physician to the Prince of Orange, writes of having been visited by a stranger who was “of a mean stature, a little long face, with a few small pock holes, and most black hair, not at all curled, a beardless chin, about three or four and forty years of age (as I guessed), and born in North Holland.”

Before I finish the story, it needs to be pointed out that Dr. Schweitzer, who was the author of several medical and botanical books, was a careful and objective observer and was a colleague of the philosopher, Baruch Spinoza. Schweitzer was a trained scientific observer, a reputable medical man, and not given to fraud or practical jokes. And yet, what I am about to describe is, in modern understanding, impossible. In fact, it was his accomplishments that “attracted” the strange man, or so the manuscript says:

After salutations ended, this new Guest, with great Reverence, asked, whether he might have freedom to come to me; because for the Pyrotechnick Art sake, he could not, nor was he willing to pass by the Door of my house; adding, that he had not only thought to have made use of some Friend to come to me, but had also read some of my little Treatises, especially that, which I published, against D. Digbies Sympathetick Powder, in which I discovered my doubt of the true Philosophick Mystery.

Therefore, this occasion being taken, he asked me, whether I could believe, that place was given to such a Mystery in the things of Nature, by the benefit of which a Physician might be able to cure all Diseases universally, unless the Sick already had a defect either of the Lungs, or Liver, or of any like noble Member?

To which I answered. Such a remedy is exceedingly necessary for a Physician, but no man knows what and how great are the Secrets yet hidden in Nature, nor did I ever in all my Life see such an Adept Man, although I have read and perused many things, touching the verity of this thing, or Art, in the Writings of Philosophers. I also enquired of him, whether he (speaking of the Universal Medicine) were not a Physician?

But he answered by denyal, professed, that he was no other than a Melter of Orichalcum, and that in the Flower of his years, he had known many things, from his Friend, rare to the Sight, and especially the way of Extracting Medicinal Arcanums by the force of Fire, and that for this very cause, he was a Lover of this so noble Science of Medicine.

Moreover, long after other discourses, touching Experiments in Metals, made by the violence of Fire, Elias the Artist spake to me thus: Do you not know the Highest Secret, when it is offered to your sight, viz. the Stone of Phylosophers, you having read in the Writings of many Chymists most excellent, touching the Substance, Colour, and strange effect of the same?

I answered, not at all; except what I have read in Paracelsus, Helmont, Basilius, Sandivogius, and like Books of Adept Phylosophers extant. Nevertheless, I think, I am not able to know the Phylosophick Matter, whether it be true, or not, although I should see it present before me.

Essentially, after something of an examination, Schweitzer was asked whether he would recognize the Philosopher’s Stone if he saw it. The stranger — Elias the Artist — then took out of his pocket a small ivory box that held “three ponderous pieces or small lumps … each about the bigness of a small walnut, transparent, of a pale brimstone colour.”

The stranger told Schweitzer that this was the very substance sought for so long by the Alchemists. Schweitzer held one of the pieces in his hand and asked the stranger if he could have just a small piece. The man refused, but Schweitzer managed to steal a small bit by scraping it with his fingernail. The visitor left after promising to return in three weeks time to show Dr. Schweitzer some “curious arts in the fire.”

As soon as he was gone, Dr. Schweitzer ran to his laboratory where he melted some lead in a crucible and added the tiny piece of stone. But, the metal did not turn into gold as he anticipated. Instead, “almost the whole mass of lead flew away, and the remainder turned into a mere glassy earth.”

Three weeks later, the mysterious stranger was at his door again. They conversed, and for a long time the man refused to allow Dr. Schweitzer see his stones again, but, at last “he gave me a crumb as big as a grape or turnip seed, saying, receive this small parcel of the greatest treasure of the world, which truly few kings or princes have ever known or seen.”

Schweitzer must have been a whiner because he recounts that he protested that this was not sufficient to transmute as much as four grains of lead into gold. At this, the stranger took the piece back, cut it in half, and flung one part in the fire, saying: “it is yet sufficient for thee!”

At this point, Schweitzer confessed his theft from the previous visit, and described how the substance had behaved with his molten lead. The stranger began to laugh and told him:

You could no more dexterously play the Thief, than apply the Tincture. I wonder, that you, so expert in the Fire, do no better understand the fuming Nature of Lead. For if you had wrapped your Theft in yellow Wax, that it might have been conserved from the Fume of Lead, then it would so have penetrated into the Lead, as to have transmuted the same into Gold.

The discussion continues, during the course of which the stranger tells Schweitzer:

The true writings of Philosophers are only understood by the truly Adept. Therefore, touching the Time, they would write nothing certain; yea, I say, no Lover of this Art, can find the Art of preparing this Mystery in his whole Life, without the Communication of some true Adept Man. In this respect, and for this Cause, I advise you, my Friend, because you have seen the true Matter of the true Work, not to forget your self, and thirsting after the perfection of this Art, to cast away your own Goods; for you can never find it out. … For unless you know the thing, from the beginning of the Work to the end, you know nothing thereof. Indeed I have told you enough, yet you are ignorant how the Stone of Philosophers is made, and again, how the Glassy Seal of Hermes is broaken, in which Sol gives forth Splendor from his Metallick Rayes, wonderfully coloured, and in which Speculum, the Eyes of Narcissus behold Metals transmutable, and from which Rayes the Adept gather their fire, by the help of which, Volatile Metals are fixed into most fixed Gold, or Silver.

The strange man leaves at this point in the story and promises to return the next morning to show Schweitzer the correct way to perform the transmutation but:

The next day he came not, nor ever since. Only he sent an excuse at half an hour past nine that morning, by reason of his great business, and promised to come at three in the afternoon, but never came, nor have I heard of him since; whereupon I began to doubt of the whole matter.

Nevertheless late that night my wife … came soliciting and vexing me to make experiment … saying to me, unless this be done, I shall have no rest nor sleep all this night … She being so earnest, I commanded a fire to be made — thinking, alas, now is this man (though so divine in discourse) found guilty of falsehood …

My wife wrapped the said matter in wax, and I cut half an ounce of six drams of old lead, and put into a crucible in the fire, which being melted, my wife put in the said Medicine made up in a small pill or button, which presently made such a hissing and bubbling in its perfect operation, that within a quarter of an hour all the mass of lead was transmuted into the … finest gold.

Baruch Spinoza, who lived nearby, came the next day to examine this gold and was convinced that Schweitzer was telling the truth. The Assay Master of the province, a Mr. Porelius, tested the metal and pronounced it genuine; and Mr. Buectel, the silversmith, subjected it to further test that confirmed that it was gold.

What occurs to me when I read this story is the fact that Schweitzer, in spite of his great learning, did not have the “right stuff,” and his attempt at purloining a bit of the “stone” was his downfall.

The philosophers taught that like attracts like and that when the disciple [or candidate] has developed a virtue and integrity acceptable to the adepts they will appear to him and reveal those parts of the secret processes which cannot be discovered without such help. … those who could not with their own intelligence discover that missing substance or process were not qualified to be entrusted with the secrets which could … subject to their will the elemental forces of Nature. (Hall 2003, 512, 513)

It seems rather clear that Schweitzer was being tested and that he failed the test. The testimony of these men survives to this day.2 Now, either all of them are lying, or Dr. Schweitzer really did have a strange experience exactly as he describes it.

The interesting thing is that other people have described similar visitations by strange men who proclaim to them the truth of the alchemical process, demonstrate it, and then mysteriously disappear. It has happened in widely enough separated places and times to suggest that it is not a collusive fraud or a delusion. Twenty years before Schweitzer’s meeting with the mysterious stranger, Jan Baptiste van Helmont, who was responsible for several important scientific discoveries, was the first man to realize that there were other gases than air, and who invented the term “gas,” wrote:

For truly I have divers times seen it [the Philosopher’s Stone], and handled it with my hands, but it was of colour such as is in Saffron in its powder, yet weighty, and shining like unto powdered glass.

There was once given unto me one fourth part of one grain [16 milligrams] … I projected [it] upon eighty ounces [227 grams] of quicksilver [mercury] made hot in a crucible; and straight-away all the quicksilver, with a certain degree of noise, stood still from flowing, and being congealed, settled like unto a yellow lump; but after pouring it out, the bellows blowing, there were found eight ounces and a little less than eleven grains of the purest gold.

Sir Isaac Newton studied alchemy until his death, remaining convinced that the possibility of transmutation existed.

The great philosophers and mathematicians, Descartes and Leibnitz, both were convinced that transmutation was a reality. Even Robert Boyle, who wrote a book entitled The Sceptical Chymist, was sure until the end of his life, that transmutation was possible. Why? These men were scientists, and the argument that their ideas or observations were less scientific than those of the present day simply does not stand up to scrutiny.

As noted, alchemists were rumored at various times to have gained immortality, and one of these was Nicolas Flamel. Flamel was a poor scribe, or scrivener and copyist. The story goes that, in 1357 he bought an old illuminated book …

The cover of it was of brass, well bound, all engraven with letters of strange figures … This I know that I could not read them nor were they either Latin of French letters … As to the matter that was written within, it was engraved (as I suppose) with an iron pencil or graver upon … bark leaves, and curiously coloured …

Reportedly, the first page was written in golden letters that said, “Abraham the Jew, Priest, Prince, Levite, Astrologer and Philosopher, to the Nation of the Jews dispersed by the Wrath of God in France, wisheth Health.” So, quite rightly Flamel referred to the manuscript as the Book of Abraham the Jew. The dedication was followed by curses upon anyone who was not either a priest or a Jew reading the book. But, Flamel was a scribe, which he must have imagined exempted him from these curses, so he read the book.

The purpose of the book was avowedly to give assistance to the dispersed Jews by teaching them to transmute lead into gold so that they could pay their taxes to the hated Roman government. The instructions were clear and easy, but only described the latter part of the process. The instructions for the beginning were said to be in the illustrations given on the fourth and fifth leaves of the book. Flamel remarked that, although these were well executed, “Yet by that could no man ever have been able to understand it without being well skilled in their Qabalah, which is a series of old traditions, and also to have been well studied in their books.”

As the story goes, Flamel tried for 21 years to find someone who could explain these pictures to him. Finally, his wife urged him to go to Spain and seek out a rabbi or other learned Jew who might assist him. So, he made the famous pilgrimage to the shrine of St. James at Compostela, carrying with him carefully made copies of the book. After his devotions at the shrine, he went to the city of Leon in northern Spain where he met a certain “Master Canches,” a Jewish physician. When this man saw the illustrations, he was “ravished with great astonishment and joy,” upon recognizing them as parts of a book that had long been believed to have been destroyed. He declared his intention to return with Flamel to France, but he died on the trip at Orleans. Flamel returned to Paris alone. But, apparently, the old Jew must have told him something for he wrote:

I had now the prima materia, the first principles, yet not their first preparation, which is a thing most difficult, above all things in the world … Finally, I found that which I desired, which I also knew by the strong scent and odour thereof. Having this, I easily accomplished the Mastery … The fist time that I made projection [transmutation] was upon Mercury, whereof I turned half a pound, or thereabouts, into pure silver, better than that of the Mine, as I myself assayed, and made others assay many times. This was upon a Monday, the 17th of January about noon, in my home, Perrenelle [his wife] only being present, in the year of the restoring of mankind 1382.

Several months later Flamel did his first transmutation into gold. Is this just a story? Well, what is true and can be verified is that Nicolas and Perenelle Flamel endowed “fourteen hospitals, three chapels and seven churches, in the city of Paris, all of which we had built from the ground, and enriched with great gifts and revenues, with many reparations in their churchyards. We also have done at Boulogne about as much as we have done at Paris, not to speak of the charitable acts which we both did to particular poor people, principally widows and orphans.”

After Flamel’s death in 1419 the rumors began. Hoping that they could find something hidden in one of his houses, people searched them again and again until one of them was completely destroyed.

There were stories that Nicolas and Perenelle were still alive. Supposedly, she had gone to Switzerland and he buried a log in her grave, and then another log was buried at his own funeral.

In the intervening centuries, the stories persist that Flamel and Perenelle defeated death. The seventeenth century traveler, Paul Lucas, while traveling in Asia Minor, met a Turkish philosopher who told him “true philosophers had had the secret of prolonging life for anything up to a thousand years …”

Lucas said, “At last I took the liberty of naming the celebrated Flamel, who, it was said, possessed the Philosopher’s Stone, yet was certainly dead. He smiled at my simplicity, and asked with an air of mirth: Do you really believe this? No, no, my friend, Flamel is still living; neither he nor his wife has yet tasted death. It is not above three years since I left both … in India; he is one of my best friends.” In 1761, Flamel and his wife were reported to have been seen attending the opera in Paris.

Well, there is an issue here regarding the supposed clue about “Abraham the Jew” which seems to point us in the direction of a Jewish fraternity of alchemists or keepers of secrets. I don’t want to go off on that thread here and now because it would add so much complexity to the issues that we might never find our way through the maze. But, to ease the mind of the reader, I will make a few remarks about this here. It’s curious that Eugene Canseliet, in his preface to the second edition of Fulcanelli’s Le Mystere des Cathedrales, apparently upon the instruction of the master alchemist, emphasized so dramatically the difference between kabbala and Cabala saying:

… this book has restored to light the phonetic cabala, whose principles and application had been completely lost. After this detailed and precise elucidation and after the brief treatment of it, which I gave in connection with the centaur, the man-horse of Plessis-Bourre, in Deux Logis Alchimiques, this mother tongue need never be confused with the Jewish Kabbala. Though never spoken, the phonetic cabala, this forceful idiom, is easily understood and it is … the instinct or voice of Nature. “By contrast, the Jewish Kabbala is full of transpositions, inversions, substitutions and calculations, as arbitrary as they are abstruse. This is why it is important to distinguish between the two words, cabala and kabballa in order to use them knowledgeably. Cabala derives from [Greek] or from the Latin caballus, a horse; kabbala is from the Hebrew Kabbalah, which means tradition. Finally, figurative meanings like coterie, underhand dealing or intrigue, developed in modern usage by analogy, should be ignored so as to reserve for the noun cabala the only significance which can be assured for it. (Fulcanelli 2000, 17)

Now, the curious bringing in of the terms “coterie,” and “underhand dealing” and “intrigue” in conjunction with what he has just remarked about Kabbalah meaning “tradition,” and Cabala being “horse,” is a most curious juxtaposition of words. It almost seems that Fulcanelli is telling us that the Kaballah, or the tradition, is a red herring. Fulcanelli himself makes a curious remark in The Dwellings of the Philosophers:

Alchemy is obscure, only because it is hidden. The philosophers who wanted to transmit the exposition of their doctrine and the fruit of their labors to posterity took great care not to divulge the art by presenting it under a common form, so that the layman could not misuse it. … That the philosophers had no other means at their disposal to steal from the ones what they wanted to expose to the others, but this confusion of metaphors, of diverse symbols, this prolixity of terms, of capricious formulas traced by the flow of the pen, expressed in clear language for the use of the greedy or the foolish … [emphasis added] (Fulcanelli, 1999)

The point of this short aside is this: don’t assume anything about Jews, Masons, or any other group when trying to solve the mystery. Nearly everything we come across will be obscured, and, when it is right out in plain view, it will be even more difficult to see.

Getting back to our purported alchemists, we come now to the year 1745 in which Prince Charles Edward Stuart, known as the “Young Pretender,” staged his Jacobite rebellion in an attempt to regain the British throne for his father the “Old Pretender.”

The Jacobite cause, for all intents and purposes, had been crushed at the battle of Culloden in April of that year, yet there was a constant fear by the British government that the Jacobites were still plotting with their French sympathizers, and being French in London was, at that time, a liability. This spy fever resulted in the arrest of many Frenchmen on trumped up charges, and most of them were later released, but it was a dangerous time for Gallic visitors.

In November of that year, one Frenchman was arrested and accused of having pro-Jacobite letters in his possession. He became very indignant and claimed that the correspondence had been planted on him. Considering the mood of the time, it is quite surprising that he was believed and released! Horace Walpole, English author and Member of Parliament, wrote a letter about this incident to Sir Horace Mann on December 9, 1745 saying:

The other day they seized an odd man who goes by the name of Count Saint-Germain. He has been here these two years, and will not tell who he is or whence, but professes that he does not go by his right name. He sings and plays on the violin wonderfully, is mad and not very sensible.

This is one of the few authentic, on-the-scene comments about one of the most mysterious characters of the 18th century.

Another acquaintance of the Count Saint-Germain, Count Warnstedt, described Saint-Germain as “The completest charlatan, fool, rattle-pate, windbag and swindler.” Yet, his last patron said that Saint-Germain was “perhaps one of the greatest sages who ever lived.” Clearly this was one of those people you either love or hate!

Saint-Germain first comes to our attention in the fashionable circles of Vienna in about 1740, where he made a stir by flaunting the fashion of the day by wearing black all the time. Everybody else was into bright colors, satins and laces, ornate patterns and designs; and along comes Saint-Germain with his somber black outfits set off by glittering diamonds on his fingers, shoe buckles, and snuff box. What an attention-getter! If you want to stand out in a roomful of robins, cardinals and blue jays, just be a blackbird. He also had the habit of carrying handfuls of loose diamonds in his pockets instead of cash!

So, there he is, garnering attention to himself in this bizarre way, and naturally he makes the acquaintance of the local leaders of fashion, Counts Zabor and Lobkowitz who introduce him to the French Marshal de Belle Isle.

Well, it seems that the Marshal was seriously under-the-weather, but his illness is not recorded so we can’t evaluate the claims that Saint-Germain cured him, but nevertheless, the Marshal was so grateful he took Saint-Germain to Paris with him and set him up with apartments and a laboratory.

The details of the Count’s life in Paris are pretty well known, and it is there that the rumors began. There is an account by a “Countess de B___” (a nom de plume, it seems, so we have to hold the information somewhat suspect), who wrote in her memoirs, Chroniques de l’oeil de boeuf, that, when she met the Count at a soiree given by the aged Countess von Georgy, whose late husband had been Ambassador to Venice in the 1670s, the old Countess remembered Saint-Germain from her days in Venice.

So, the old girl asked the Count if his father had been there at the time. He replied no, but he had. Well, the man that Countess von Georgy had known was at least 45 years old then, at least 50 years ago, which appeared to be the age of the man standing before her. The Count smiled and said, “I am very old.” “But then you must be nearly 100 years old,” the Countess exclaimed. “That is not impossible,” the Count replied. He then related some details that convinced the old lady that it was really him she knew in Venice.

The Countess exclaimed, “I am already convinced. You are a most extraordinary man, a devil!”

“For pity’s sake!” cried Saint-Germain in a loud voice heard all around the room. “No such names!” And he began to tremble all over and left the room immediately.3

A pretty dramatic introduction to society, don’t you think? But, was it real, or the ploy of a very clever con artist? Did he deliberately choose to adopt the name of someone long dead, about whom he may have already known a great deal, and then did he set out to deceive and con in a manner well known to us in the present time? Was he a snake oil salesman or a true man of mystery?

In any event, that was the beginning of the legend, and many more stories of a similar nature spread through society like wildfire. Saint-Germain apparently fed the fires with hints that he had known the Holy Family intimately and had been invited to the marriage feast at Cana where Jesus turned water into wine, and dropped casually the remark that he “had always known that Christ would meet a bad end.” According to him, he had been very fond of Anne, the mother of the Virgin Mary, and had even proposed her canonization at the Council of Nicaea in AD 325!

What a guy! A line for every occasion!

Pretty soon the Count had Louis XV and his mistress, Madame de Pompadour, eating out of his hand, and it certainly could be true that he was a French spy in England when he was arrested there, because he later did handle some sticky business for the credulous king of France.

In 1760, Louis sent Saint-Germain to the Hague as his personal representative to arrange a loan with Austria that was supposed to help finance the Seven Years’ war against England. But, while in Holland, the Count had a falling out with his friend Casanova, who was also a diplomat at The Hague. Casanova tried hard to discredit Saint-Germain in public, but without success. One has to wonder just what it was that Casanova discovered or came to think about Saint-Germain at this time?

In any event, Saint-Germain was making other enemies. One of these enemies was the Duc de Choiseul, King Louis’ Foreign Minister. The Duc discovered that Saint-Germain had been scoping out the possibilities of arranging a peace between England and France. Now, that doesn’t sound like a bad plan at all, but the Duc managed to convince the King that this was a dire betrayal, and the Count had to flee to England and then back to Holland.

In Holland, the Count lived under the name “Count Surmont,” and he worked to raise money to set up laboratories in which he made paint and dyes and engaged in his alchemical experiments. By all accounts, he was successful in some sense, because he disappeared from Holland with 100,000 guilders!

He next shows up in Belgium as the “Marquis de Monferrat.” He set up another laboratory with “other people’s money” before disappearing again. (Are we beginning to see a pattern here?)

For a number of years, Saint-Germain’s activities continued to be reported from various parts of Europe and, in 1768 he popped up in the court of Catherine the Great. Turkey had just declared war on Russia, and Saint-Germain promoted himself as a valuable diplomat because of his status as an insider in French politics. Pretty soon he was the adviser of Count Alexei Orlov, head of the Russian Imperial Forces. Orlov made him a high-ranking officer of the Russian Army and Saint-Germain acquired an English alias, “General Welldone.”

His successes in Russia could have enabled him to retire on his laurels, but he didn’t. In 1774 he appeared in Nuremberg seeking money from the Margrave of Brandenburg, Charles Alexander. His ostensible alias at this point (apparently he was no longer satisfied with being either a Count or a Marquis) was Prince Rakoczy of Transylvania!

Naturally, the Margrave of Brandenburg was impressed when Count Orlov visited Nuremburg on a state visit and embraced “the Prince” warmly. But later, when the Margrave did a little investigating, he discovered that the real Prince Rakoczy was indubitably dead and that this counterfeit Prince was, in fact, only Count Saint-Germain. Saint-Germain did not deny the charges, but apparently he felt that it was now time to move on.

The Duc de Choiseul, Saint-Germain’s old enemy, had claimed that the Count was in the employ of Frederick the Great. But, that was probably not true because, at this point, Saint-Germain wrote to Frederick begging for patronage. Frederick ignored him, which is peculiar if he had been in the employ of the Prussian king as de Choiseul thought. But, never to be discouraged as is the case with many conmen who can never quite figure out when to quit, Saint-Germain went to Leipzig and presented himself to Prince Frederick Augustus of Brunswick as a Freemason of the fourth grade.

Now, Frederick Augustus just happened to be the Grand Master of the Prussian Masonic Lodges, so this was really a stupid move on the part of Saint-Germain since it turned out that he was not a Mason. But, it is true of the pattern of all con men … their egos eventually prove to be their downfall. The Prince challenged Saint-Germain because he did not know the secret signals and sent him away as a fraud.

In 1779, Saint-Germain was an old man in his 60s who continued to claim to be vastly older. He must have learned to subdue his ego somewhat because, at Eckenforde in Schleswig, Germany, he was able to charm Prince Charles of Hesse-Cassel. At this point, part of his scam included being a mystic, for he is recorded as having told Prince Charles:

Be the torch of the world. If your light is that only of a planet, you will be as nothing in the sight of God. I reserve for you a splendour, of which the solar glory is a shadow. You shall guide the course of the stars, and those who rule Empires shall be guided by you.

Sounds rather like the buildup to another con job! Nothing like feeding the ego of the “mark” before slipping away with all his money. In this case, it didn’t work. Prince Charles made no mark on history and on February 27, 1784, Saint-Germain died at Prince Charles’ home on Eckenforde. He was buried locally and the Prince erected a stone that said: “He who called himself the Comte de Saint-Germain and Welldone of whom there is no other information, has been buried in this church.” Then, the Prince burned all of the Count’s papers, “lest they be misinterpreted.” Supposedly there is evidence that the Count did not die, and many occultists claim he is still alive for these past two centuries.

The mystery of Saint-Germain is mostly due to the uncertainty surrounding his origins. One source says that he was born in 1710 in San Germano, son of a tax collector. Eliphas Levi, the nineteenth century occultist, said that Saint-Germain was born in Lentmeritz in Bohemia, and was the bastard son of a nobleman who was also a Rosicrucian. The first theory is more likely to be correct.

It is known that he had a genuine gift for languages and could speak French, German, English, Dutch and Russian fluently. He also claimed that he was fluent in Chinese, Hindu and Persian, but there was no one about to test him on those.

We note that Horace Walpole said that he was a wonderful violinist and singer and painter, though none of his purported art has been known to have survived. Supposedly, he was able to paint jewels that glittered in a very lifelike way. There is also a great deal of anecdotal evidence that Saint-Germain was an expert jeweler — he claimed to have studied the art with the Shah of Persia. In any event, he is reported to have repaired a flawed diamond for Louis XV, who was very pleased with the result.

Saint-Germain also was said to have had an extensive knowledge of chemistry in all its branches at the time, and the many laboratories that he set up with borrowed money were all designed to produce brighter and better pigments and dyes and also for alchemical studies.

Then, there was his reputation as a healer. Not only did he allegedly cure the Marshal de Belle Isle, he also was supposed to have cured a friend of Madame de Pompadour of mushroom poisoning.

Saint-Germain never ate in company, which appears to have been part of his plan to focus attention on himself. He could sit at a table where everyone else was gorging on the most amazing array of delectable dishes, and eat and drink nothing. Casanova wrote:

Instead of eating, he talked from the beginning of the meal to the end, and I followed his example in one respect as I did not eat, but listened to him with the greatest attention. It may safely be said that as a conversationalist he was unequaled.

I can certainly think of a couple of individuals about whom I could say the same thing. In both cases, they most certainly were psychopaths, who have a reputation among experts for being well-versed in the gift of gab. Colin Wilson, author of The Occult, thought that Saint-Germain must have been a vegetarian.

So, in the end, the real mystery, aside from his origins — although the two may be connected — is, where did Saint-Germain get all his specialized knowledge? Of course, as we have noted here, not all who met Saint-Germain were impressed by his talents. Casanova was entertained by him, but nevertheless thought that he was a fraud and a charlatan. He wrote:

This extraordinary man, intended by nature to be the king of impostors and quacks, would say in an easy, assured manner that he was three hundred years old, that he knew the secret of the Universal Medicine, that he possessed a mastery over nature, that he could melt diamonds, professing himself capable of forming, out of 10 or 12 small diamonds, one of the finest water … All this, he said, was a mere trifle to him.

Notwithstanding his boastings, his barefaced lies, and his manifold eccentricities, I cannot say I found him offensive. In spite of my knowledge of what he was and in spite of my own feelings, I thought him an astonishing man …

I have to say that I thought the same thing about the two psychopaths I knew with similar talents.

Count Alvensleben, a Prussian Ambassador to the Court at Dresden, wrote in 1777:

He is a highly gifted man with a very alert mind, but completely without judgment, and he has only gained his singular reputation by the lowest and basest flattery of which a man is capable, as well as by his outstanding eloquence, especially if one lets oneself be carried away by the fervour and the enthusiasm with which he can express himself. Inordinate vanity is the mainspring driving his whole mechanism.

The ambassador’s remark that Germain was “without judgment” is interesting as this is the very symptom that emerges again and again in cases of psychopathy studied by Hervey Cleckley and written about in his book The Mask of Sanity.

It sounds like an easy thing to dismiss Saint Germain out of hand, but in the case of the Count, we have a little problem: just which of the stories are really about him?

The plot thickens!

It seems that Berthold Volz, in the 1920s, did some deep research on the subject and discovered, or so it is claimed, that the Duc de Choiseul, who was overwhelmingly jealous of the Count, hired a look-alike impostor to go about as the Count, exaggerating and playing the fool in order to place the Count in a bad light. Is this just another story, either wishful thinking or deliberately designed to perpetuate the legend? Are we getting familiar with this “bait and switch” routine yet?

Supposedly, Saint-Germain foretold the outbreak of the French Revolution to Marie Antoinette who purportedly wrote in her diary that she regretted that she did not heed his advice. I haven’t seen it, so can’t vouch for it. But, in my opinion, it wouldn’t be too hard a thing to predict, considering the political climate of the time.

It was said that Saint-Germain appeared in Wilhelmsbad in 1785, a year after he was supposed to have died, and he was accompanied by the magician Cagliostro, the hypnotist Anton Mesmer, and the “unknown philosopher,” Louis Claude de St. Martin.4 But it is hearsay and may be designed to create a link between the Martinists and Saint-Germain.

Saint-Germain was alleged to have gone to Sweden in 1789 to warn King Gustavus III of danger. Next he visited his friend, diarist Mademoiselle d’Adhemar, who said he still looked like he was only 46 years old. Apparently, he told her that she would see him five more times, and she claimed this was, in fact, the case. Supposedly the last visit was the night before the murder of the Duc de Berri in 1820.

Again, we find this to be unsupported by evidence.

Napoleon III ordered a commission to investigate the life and activities of Saint-Germain, but the findings were destroyed in a fire at the Hotel de Ville in Paris in 1871, which many people think is beyond coincidence. My thought would be that the only reason to destroy such a report would be if it had proved the Count to be a fraud. The result of this fire is that the legend is enabled to live on. Therefore, it is likely that the report would have made some difference in the legend, such as putting it to rest as a fraud. Had it been helpful to the legend, it would not have changed what is already the case, which is that people believe that Saint-Germain was something of a supernatural being. Thus, its destruction, if engineered, must only have been to protect the status quo.

One of the next threads of the legend was gathered into the hands of Helena Blavatsky who claimed that Saint-Germain was one of the “hidden masters” along with Christ, Buddha, Appollonius of Tyana, Christian Rosencreutz, Francis Bacon and others. A group of Theosophists traveled to Paris after WWII where they were told they would meet the Count; he never showed up.

In 1972, a Frenchman named Richard Chanfray was interviewed on French television. He claimed to be Saint-Germain and, supposedly, in front of television cameras, transmuted lead into gold on a camp stove!

Lest we forget, there is also the matter of the more recent “communications” of the count to the head of the Church Universal and Triumphant, Elizabeth Clare Prophet.

In the end, on the subject of Saint-Germain, we find lies and confusion. But, by now, we are getting used to it and are learning to think in different ways. If Saint-Germain was a fraud, we have to think somewhat carefully about those who claim him as their “connection” to things esoteric.

All of the confusion surrounding the subject prompted me to ask the Cassiopaeans a few questions:

Q: (L) What is the Philosophers Stone?

A: Idea center.

Q: (L) How can this idea center be accessed?

A: Many ways: meditation is the best.

Q: (L) Is there any visual image of the Philosopher’s Stone that one could use to access it in meditation?

A: Yes. Diamond or prism.

Q: (L) Was there or is there such a thing as a literal, physical, Philosopher’s Stone that can transmute lead into gold?

A: No.

Q: (L) Was anybody ever able to transmute lead into gold by any means?

A: Everybody is able.

Q: (L) How?

A: You must discover this yourself.

Q: (L) Is this knowledge written down somewhere on the planet?

A: Yes, but it will be easier in fourth level.

Q: (L) Comte St. Germain claimed to be able to transmute lead into gold.

Was this true?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) He also claimed to have discovered the secret of eternal youth, was this true?

A: No.

Q: (L) Did he die like everybody else at the regular age?

A: Yes.

During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, alchemy lost favor with the rise of experimental science. The time was that of such stellar names as Lavoisier, Priestley and Davy. Dalton’s atomic theory and a host of discoveries in chemistry and physics made it clear to all “legitimate” scientists that alchemy was only a “mystical” and, at best, harmless pastime of no scientific value.

Organizations such as the Golden Dawn and Ordo Templi Orientis devised corrupted mixtures of snippets of alchemy and oriental philosophy, stirred in with the western European magical traditions, but these were clearly distorted imitations composed mostly of wishful thinking.

When one deeply studies the so-called adepts of these “systems,” one is confronted again and again with the archetype of the failed magician so that one can only shake one’s head and remember the warning of the great alchemists that for those who do not develop within themselves the “special state” that is required for the Great Work, only disaster can result.

There is no doubt in my mind that such groups dabble in alchemy of a sort, or “magick” of another, and there is no doubt that they may, in fact, conjure connections to sources of power on occasion. But, overall, a survey of what can be learned about them tends to point in the direction of much wishful thinking or even the possibility of domination by the forces of darkness in the guise of angels of light.

Nevertheless, in 1919, British physicist Ernest Rutherford announced that he had achieved a successful transmutation of one element into another: nitrogen to oxygen! Admittedly, his procedures and results in no way resembled the work of the alchemists; but, what he had done was refute the insistence of most scientists of the day that transmutation was impossible. In fact, it became known that radioactive elements gradually decay, giving off radiation and producing daughter elements which then decay even further. For instance one such chain starts with uranium and the end product is lead.

So, the question became, can the process be reversed? Or, if you start with another element, what might you end up with?

Franz Tausend was a 36 year-old chemical worker in Munich who had a theory about the structure of the elements that was a strange mixture of Pythagoreanism and modern chemistry. He published a pamphlet entitled “180 elements, their atomic weight, and their incorporation in a system of harmonic periods.” He thought that every atom had a frequency of vibration characteristic of that element, related to the weight of the atom’s nucleus and the grouping of the electrons around it. This part of his idea was shown to be basically correct by later research. However, Tausend further suggested that matter could be “orchestrated” by adding the right substance to the element, thereby changing its vibration frequency, in which case, it would become a different element.

As it happened, at about the same time, Adolf Hitler was sent to prison for attempting to organize an armed uprising. One of Hitler’s cohorts was General Erich Ludendorff, but Ludendorff was acquitted of the charges and ran for president of Germany the following year. He was defeated by Hindenburg, so he turned his mind to raising money for the nascent Nazi party. He heard rumors that a certain Tausend had transmuted base metals into gold, and he formed a group, including numerous industrialists, to investigate this process. Tausend gave instructions that they should purchase iron oxide and quartz, which were melted together in a crucible.

A German merchant and member of this group, named Stremmel, took the crucible to his hotel bedroom for the night so that it could not be tampered with. The next morning, Tausend heated the crucible in his electric furnace in the presence of his patrons, and then added a small quantity of white powder to the molten mass. It was allowed to cool, and then, when it was broken open, a gold nugget weighing seven grams was inside.

Ludendorff, to say the least, was ecstatic. He set about forming a company called Company 164. Investment money poured in and within a year the general had diverted some 400,000 marks into Nazi Party funds. Then, in December, 1926, he resigned, leaving Tausend to handle all the debts.

Tausend managed to continue raising money and on June 16, 1928, supposedly made 25 ounces of gold in a single operation. This enabled him to issue a series of share certificates worth 22 pounds each (10 kilograms of gold).

A year later, when no more gold had been produced, Tausend was arrested for fraud, tried, found guilty, and sentenced to four years in prison. Nevertheless, while waiting for trial, he was able to perform a transmutation under strict supervision, in the Munich Mint. This was submitted to the court as evidence that no fraud had taken place, but it was contested and did not save him from prison.

In the same year that Tausend was convicted, a Polish engineer named Dunikovski announced in Paris that he had discovered a new kind of radiation, which would transmute quartz into gold. The mineral, spread on copper plates, was melted by an electric discharge at 110,000 volts, and was then irradiated with these new “z-rays.”

Investors poured two million francs into Dunikovski’s project, but, within a few months, when no gold appeared, he was also tried and found guilty of fraud. After two years in prison, Dunikovski’s lawyer obtained an early release, and he went with his family to Italy where he again began to experiment. Rumors soon started that he was supporting himself by the occasional sale of lumps of gold. His lawyer, accompanied by the eminent chemist, Albert Bonn, went to see him. What was discovered was that the quartz being used by Dunikovski (and presumably by Tausend as well) already contained minute quantities of gold. The gold could be extracted by a usual process, producing about 10 parts per million, but Dunikovski’s technique produced almost 100 times as much. Nevertheless, he was only dealing with small quantities of gold because his equipment could only handle small quantities of quartz.

Dunikovski claimed that his process accelerated the natural growth of “embryonic” gold within the quartz. He gave a demonstration before an invited group of scientists, which attracted considerable attention. An Anglo-French syndicate formed to bring sand from Africa and treat it in a big new laboratory on the south coast of England, but WWII started at about this time and Dunikovski disappeared. It was rumored that he was co-opted by the Germans and manufactured gold for them to bolster their failing economy — but there is no proof.

Since WWII, there have been and still are, many practitioners of alchemy. Much of this activity has been centered in France, including Eugene Canseliet who was a pupil of the mysterious Fulcanelli mentioned above.

In studying alchemy and the history of alchemy and all related books I could find, I came finally to Fulcanelli and the mention of him in the book Morning of the Magicians by Pauwels and Bergier. Bergier claimed that in June of 1937 — eight years before the first atom-bomb test in New Mexico — he was approached by an impressive but mysterious stranger. The man asked Bergier to pass on a message to the noted physicist Andre Helbronner, for whom Bergier was then working. The man said that he felt it was his duty to warn orthodox scientists of the danger of nuclear energy. He said that the alchemists of bygone times — and previous civilizations — had obtained such secret knowledge and it had destroyed them. The mysterious stranger said that he really had no hope that his warning would be heeded, but felt that he ought to give it anyway. Jacques Bergier remained convinced until the day he died that the stranger was Fulcanelli.

As the story goes, the American Office for Strategic Services, the forerunner of the CIA, made an intensive search for Fulcanelli at the end of the war. He was never found.

The argument against this strange event ever having happened is that plutonium was specifically named by the mystery man, yet it was not isolated until February of 1941, and was not named until March of 1942. This was five years after Bergier’s encounter. Nevertheless, Bergier stood by his story.

The fact is, if we are talking about Master Alchemists who have achieved the Great Work, the history seems to indicate that they have time travel capabilities to some extent. So, the matter of knowing the name of the element would not have been too great a difficulty.

Nevertheless,Patrick Rivière, a student of Canseliet, says that the whole story was made up by Bergier who later identified the mysterious stranger with Rene Schwaller, who recent investigators have claimed was the “real Fulcanelli.” Reading the works of Canseliet, Fulcanelli, and Schwaller, strongly suggests that Schwaller was not Fulcanelli, nor was Canseliet the author of Fulcanelli’s books.

So, let’s look at Fulcanelli in more depth. In the early 1920s, in Paris, Eugene Canseliet was known as an alchemical enthusiast. He made many references to the fact that he worked with an actual Master of the Art. His friend and companion, a poverty stricken illustrator named Jean-Julien Champagne, who was a score of years older than Canseliet, supported these claims. The two of them lived in a run-down building, in adjacent apartments, at 59 bis, rue de Rochechouart, in the Butte-Montmartre district.

Because of their hints that they had contact with such a Hidden Master, they soon became the center of a circle of aspiring occultists. It has been claimed that both Canseliet and Champagne were frequently seen in the city libraries, the Bibliotheque Nationale, the Mazarin, the Arsenal and the Sainte Genevieve, studying rare books and manuscripts. Obviously, they were looking for something.

The story heard by those on the edges of their elite little group were to the effect that this Hidden Master Fulcanelli was old, distinguished — possibly an aristocrat — and very rich. He was also said to be an immensely learned, practicing alchemist who had either already, or almost, achieved the Great Work.

Nobody except Canseliet and Champagne apparently ever met Master Fulcanelli, and, because of this, a great deal of skepticism arose in the occult circles of Paris. That skepticism was laid to rest with the publication of Le Mystere des Cathedrales in 1926, which I have mentioned previously.

The first edition consisted of only 300 copies, and was published by Jean Schemit, of 45 rue Lafitte, in the Opera district. It was subtitled “An esoteric interpretation of the hermetic symbols of the Great Work,” and its preface was written by Eugene Canseliet, then aged only 26. The book had 36 illustrations, two of them in color, by the artist, Champagne.

The subject of the book was a purported interpretation of the symbolism of various Gothic cathedrals and other buildings in Europe as being encoded instructions of alchemical secrets. This idea, that the secrets were contained in the stone structures, carvings, and so forth, of the medieval buildings had been hinted at by other writers on esoteric art and architecture, but no one had ever explicated the subject so clearly and in such detail before. In any event, Fulcanelli’s book caused a sensation among the Parisian occultists.

In the preface, written by Canseliet, there is the hint that Master Fulcanelli had attained the Stone — that is, had become mystically transfigured and illuminated, and had disappeared:

He disappeared when the fatal hour struck, when the Sign was accomplished … Fulcanelli is no more. But we have at least this consolation that his thought remains, warm and vital, enshrined forever in these pages.

The extraordinary scholarship and unique qualities of the personality of the writer of Le Mystere drove the occultists of Paris to endless speculation about who Fulcanelli really was. About these speculations regarding Fulcanelli’s possible identity, Kenneth Rayner Johnson writes:

There were suggestions that he was a surviving member of the former French royal family, the Valois. Although they were supposed to have died out in 1589 upon the demise of Henri III, it was known that members of the family had dabbled in magic and mysticism and that Marguerite de France, daughter of Henri II and wife of Henri IV of Navarre, survived until 1615. What is more, one of her many lovers was the esoterically inclined Francis Bacon (whom many still claim as an adept to this day); she was divorced in 1599 and her personal crest bore the magical pentagram, each of whose five points carried one letter of the Latin word salus — meaning ‘health.’ Could the reputedly aristocratic Fulcanelli be a descendant of the Valois, and did the Latin motto hint that some important alchemical secret of longevity had been passed on to him by the family?

Actually, there is no proof that Marguerite de France and Francis Bacon were lovers. There is even the possibility that Marguerite, Queen of Navarre, wife of Henri, King of Navarre (who became King Henri IV of France), and daughter of Henri II and Catherine de Medici, has been confused with her great Aunt, Marguerite, wife of Henri d’Albret, King of Navarre (who was never King of France), and who was also Queen of Navarre, but was the daughter of Charles of Orleans, and sister of Francois I, King of France. In short, Marguerite, who lived during the time of Francis Bacon, was the great niece of Marguerite who lived during the time of Nostradamus and Rabelais.

Some claimed Fulcanelli was a bookseller-occultist, Pierre Dujols, who with his wife ran a shop in the rue de Rennes in the Luxembourg district of Paris. But Dujols was already known to have been only a speculative alchemist, writing under the nom de plume of Magophon. Why should he hide behind two aliases?

Another suggestion was that Fulcanelli was the writer J. H. Rosny the elder. Yet his life was too well- known to the public for this theory to find acceptance.

There were also at least three practical alchemists working in the city around the same period. They operated under the respective pseudonyms of Auriger, Faugerons and Dr. Jaubert. The argument against them being Fulcanelli was much the same as that against Dujols-Magophon: why use more than one alias?

Finally, there were Eugene Canseliet and Jean-Julien Champagne, both of whom were directly connected with Fulcanelli’s book, and both of whom had claimed to have known the Master personally. (Johnson 1992)

There was one major objection to Canseliet being Fulcanelli: he was too young to possibly have gained the knowledge apparent in the book. And, yes, a study of his preface as compared with the text of the book demonstrated distinctly different styles. So, Canseliet was excluded.

Champagne is the next likely suspect because he was older and more experienced, and it was a certainty that his work as an artist had taken him around France so that he would have had opportunity to view all the monuments described in such detail. The only problem with this theory was that Champagne was a “noted braggart, practical joker, punster and drunkard, who frequently liked to pass himself off as Fulcanelli — although his behaviour was entirely out of keeping with the traditional solemn oath of the adept to remain anonymous and let his written work speak for itself.” And, in addition to that, Champagne was an alcoholic whose imbibing of absinthe and Pernod eventually killed him. He died in 1932 of gangrene at the age of 55. His toes actually fell off. Doesn’t sound much like a Master Alchemist. (On the other hand, some of the descriptions of the transmutation of the alchemist make you wonder if the toes falling off isn’t part of the process!)

Joking aside, there are many more details and curiosities involved in the sorting out of who or what Fulcanelli may have really been. The bottom line is: more than one person has attested to Fulcanelli’s existence, his success in transmutation and to his continued existence into the present time — which would make him over 140 years old. Some theorists think he may be older than that!5

The Morning of the Magicians, by Louis Pauwels and Jacques Bergier, was published in 1963, and it was only then that English-speaking occultists and students of alchemy became aware of Fulcanelli.6 At that point in time, it was to be another eight years before Le Mystere Des Cathedrales would be translated into English. But, each of these books awoke a whole new audience of seekers to the possibility of present day miracles as well as the very real likelihood of a millennia old secret held in trust by persons unknown.

In the English edition of Mystery of the Cathedrals, Eugene Canseliet said that the Master had given him a minute quantity of the alchemical “powder of projection” in 1922 — and permitted him to transmute four ounces of lead into gold. Vincent Lang, who wrote the introduction to the book, received a letter from Canseliet, which said, in part:

“The Master was already a very old man but he carried his eighty years lightly. Thirty years later, I was to see him again … and he appeared to be a man of fifty. That is to say, he appeared to be a man no older than I was myself.”

Canseliet has since said that he has met with Fulcanelli several times since and that Fulcanelli is still living. (Johnson 1992)

The only person who claimed to have seen Fulcanelli since was Canseliet, his pupil. He said that he met the Master in Spain in 1954 under highly unusual circumstances. The late Gerard Heym, founder member of the Society for the Study of Alchemy and Early Chemistry and editor of Ambix, its journal, acclaimed as Europe’s foremost occult scholar of his day, made friends with Canseliet’s daughter and through her, had a look at Canseliet’s passport. It did in fact carry a Spanish entry-visa stamp for 1954. So, at least on this one item we have a fact. A friend of Canseliet, who wished to remain anonymous, said that this meeting was “in another dimension … a point where such meetings are possible.”

The story was that Canseliet “received a summons,” of some sort; perhaps telepathic, and traveled to Seville where he was met and taken by a long, roundabout route, to a large mountainChâteau which proved to be an enclave of alchemists — a colony! He said that Fulcanelli appeared to have undergone a curious form of transformation so that he had characteristics of both male and female — he was androgynous. At one point, Canseliet said, Fulcanelli actually had the complete characteristics of a woman. Some alchemical literature does point to this androgyny. The adept going through the transformation supposedly loses all hair, teeth and nails and grows new ones. The skin becomes younger, smoother and the face takes on asexual characteristics. This reminded me of what the Cassiopaeans had once said about transitioning to fourth density:

Q: (L) Now if, theoretically, an individual was to develop in a natural way by making all the proper choices, and was to arrive at the point in time when the major transition is to be made, would that individual’s body pass through into that heightened dimension in a physical state?

A: Of course.

Q: (L) Now suppose this theoretical person were to pass through this transition to the other side, what state would they find their body in? Would it be exactly as it is now in terms of solidity? What would be the experience?

A: The key concept here is variability of physicality.

Q: (L) Does this mean that everybody will be different or that an individual will have greater control over the substance and constitution of the body?

A: Not exactly either. Your physicality will be variable according to need and circumstance.

Q: (L) OK, does this mean that sometimes we will be more of a light body?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Does this mean that sometimes we will be more of a firm body as we have now?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Will our bodies age differently?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) What will be the median lifespan?

A: 400 years

Q: (L) And will those who pass through this transition as, say, 50-year-olds, will they have an equal opportunity to live an additional 400 years?

A: Will regenerate in youthful appearance.

So, this is a fascinating idea that the alchemical transmutation is an interaction with another density. And, there was another comment made about this regarding the seeming androgyny:

A: Picture driving down a highway, suddenly you notice auras surrounding everything … Being able to see around corners, going inside little cottages which become mansions, when viewed from inside … Going inside a building in Albuquerque and going out the back door into Las Vegas, going to sleep as a female, and waking up male … Flying in a plane for half an hour and landing at the same place 5 weeks later … Fourth density frees one from the illusion of “time” as you will to perceive it. … Picture driving to reach New Mexico by car and “skipping” over and arriving in San Diego instead, or … driving to the grocery store in Santa Fe, and winding up in Moscow, instead.

It would certainly not be a stretch, in such a reality, to transmute lead into gold. The key seems to be accessing the fourth density reality, and that requires the transmutation of the alchemist.

But, returning to our discussion: After Canseliet’s visit to the enclave of the alchemists, Gerard Heym said that he only had vague recollections of his experiences in Spain, as though some form of hypnosis had been used on him to make him forget the details of what he had seen and been told. (Why are we not surprised?)

The point of this recitation is that there have been many well-attested stories of strange things about alchemy reported by reliable and reputable witnesses, and the stories continue in a sort of subculture down to this very day. There is something going on, and it has been going on for a very long time. So, the trail of Fulcanelli, which was getting very interesting, ended in Seville.

At about this point, I watched the David Hudson video about Monoatomic Gold. I was pretty excited by David Hudson’s purported discovery, though there were some elements of the story that didn’t quite fit. Nevertheless, after gathering all this data, I thought I was ready to ask the Cassiopaeans for the next set of clues:

Q: (L) OK, back when we were talking about the pit on Oak Island, and you asked me to do some research on it, the answers I came up with were that the responsible group were alchemists. Is this correct?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Was one of the alchemists involved Nicholas Flamel?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Is it true that there is an enclave of alchemists that live somewhere in the Pyrenees?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Do these alchemists use this power as talked about by David Hudson to enhance their longevity and their physical health?

A: And to control.

Q: (L) Are there people in this enclave who live for literally hundreds, if not thousands, of years?

A: Open.

In retrospect, I understand that the Cassiopaeans were very gently indicating the opening of a certain path, a course of study and learning that was to have enormous implications. Most curious of all, the connections of “Arcadia,” “sect,” and “alchemy” would become the central motif of the Greatest Mystery of all — the search for the Holy Grail.

And it all began on Oak Island …

1 See bibliography for books and articles on Oak Island.

2 See John Frederick Helvetius, The Golden Calf, Which the World Adores, and Desires, London, 1670.

3 These accounts are compiled in Isabel Cooper-Oakley’s The Comte de St. Germain (1912), and Frank Smyth’s The Man from Nowhere: Searching for St. Germain (1992).

4 According to the Martinist Order: St Martin was born in 1743 and was trained for the legal profession but he bought himself a commission in the French Army and was stationed in Bordeaux. It was in Bordeaux he encountered Scottish Rite Freemasonry, was Initiated but eventually he became disappointed with their system and he subsequently resigned and broke all contacts with it. Shortly afterwards he became fully involved with a mystic stream or Tradition that had included such names as Court de Gebelin, Benjamin Franklin the American statesman and the English Nobleman, Sir Francis Dashwood. He travelled widely and following an invitation from the Golitzin family in Russia he went there and was Initiated into the Lineage that now runs through the British Martinist Order.

5Patrick Rivière’s book Fulcanelli: His True Identity Revealed, published by Red Pill Press, offers what I think to be the definitive investigation into Fulcanelli’s identity.

6 It has been noted by the student of Fulcanelli’s only disciple Eugene Canseliet, Patrick Riviere, that Bergier — just before he died — claimed that Schwaller and Fulcanelli were one and the same individual. Andre VandenBroeck’s AL-KEMI, A MEMOIR: Hermetic, Occult, Political and Private Aspects of R.A. Schwaller de Lubicz (1987 Inner Traditions/Lindisfarn Press) claims a clandestine collaboration between Fulcanelli and Rene Schwaller. Supposedly, Schwaller confided to VandenBroeck that Fulcanelli stole from him an original manuscript on the alchemical symbolism of the Gothic Cathedrals and published it under his own name as Mystery of the Cathedrals. VandenBroeck’s allegation seems to be supported only by VandenBroeck himself, and simply does not fit the facts or the timeline. In her work Fulcanelli Dévoilé (1992 Dervy)Geneviève Dubois suggests that Schwaller believed Jean-Julien Champagne to be Fulcanelli and that it was Champagne who took the manuscript. Champagne was quite a practical joker and was happy to let others think he was Fulcanelli.