The Wave Chapter 54: Glimpses of Other Realities

Now, just to keep the sequence of events fresh in the readers mind, Vincent Bridges first wrote to me in May of 1999, after one of my posts to the Ancient Wisdom list had been forwarded to him by Ray Flowers of SanGraal.com, a website connected to the Axiom Visiting Faculty, which lists Drunvalo Melchizidek and a few others who can be shown to have links – even if nebulous – to the Aviary. The Aviary was a subject of investigation by Blue, who was on Sarfatti’s email group. Blue introduced us to Sarfatti in late 1998, and Ark joined this discussion in February of 1999. Now, remember the strange invitation to the January 1997 conference at the Central European University in Budapest that I have already described in an earlier chapter? Remember the funny event I described where Ark’s documents were stolen, and returned under such a bizarre circumstances?

Well, the reader may wish to do some research into something called the United Religions Initiative (URI). This is a project funded by the same Foundations that have been intimately involved with the funding of the CEU in Budapest. Barbara Marx Hubbard, a “futurist,” is one of their spokespersons, making many appearances at New Age-type events. In addition to being a member of the Axiom Visiting Faculty, she has a lot of other interesting connections, as we later discovered. For the past couple of months, several members of the egroup have been researching pretty heavily into these areas, and as we go along, we hope that we will be able to present some of their findings. But just now, the atmosphere is pretty heavy, and we feel the hot breath of something rather vicious breathing on our heels.

The very act of writing these pages, exposing these connections, puts our work, our website, and perhaps even our lives, in grave peril. At the present moment, the attacks have escalated, both in the psychic spheres, as well as from the agents of the Matrix through various avenues, including financial institutions.

To understand what we’re dealing with here, let me tell you what happened to Blue. Blue was a really tough skeptic, and gleefully tore just about everything and everybody apart, but for some reason, he really loved the Cs and would call to ask a question now and again during a session. His skepticism prevented him from following a couple of pieces of very sharp advice from the Cs and he was ultimately taken out. And I do mean that literally. The dissolution of his marriage and loss of everything he held dear seems, in retrospect, to have been arranged and then, a love bite situation seems to have been set up to entrap him on the rebound, in his misery. This woman who “gave him tea and comfort” during a terrible time also gave him heroin.

In June of 2002, he sent me an email with an attached photograph showing him in a condition that was absolutely shocking. He was totally skeletal. At that point, he was in a halfway house, I believe, but he was later incarcerated and his great work came to an end.

Getting back to the story, at the point in time I am describing, none of the connections that are now apparent were part of our awareness. We had a vague understanding of fourth-density manipulations, and how agents could be activated and used, but we were actually pretty naive about it. I would like to call the readers attention back to the email I wrote to our own little discussion group which, at the time, consisted of only about a dozen members – not even large enough to run it on a regular egroup list. The part I would like to emphasize is the letter I quoted from Linda Moulton Howe’s book, Glimpses of Other Realities:

“Your comments and thoughts concerning ancient civilizations and their contacts with the [aliens] need to be considered in light of the bigger picture of the deception of mankind as a whole. If this grand deception is taking the course it seems to be, then it makes sense to analyze the false gods of ancient civilizations in light of the current level of deception. It is only logical that, given their non-human, other-dimensional nature, the [aliens] would be able to foresee the need to establish a foundational base, the facts of which could be slightly twisted, or distorted by the fog of antiquity and forgotten cultural distinctiveness, to seemingly establish themselves as the bringers of all good things to humanity.

“Explore Jacques Vallee’s ‘Passport to Magonia’ again, for more close parallels between the ‘faerie’ manifestation of the [aliens] and current events. And look very closely at ‘Messengers of Deception,’ Dr. Vallee was so close to the truth of the situation, with the exception that the ultimate manipulators are not human.”

And that was precisely what the Cassiopaeans were telling us, though they were giving details of this other reality that we had never before encountered. There were, of course, researchers who had come to very similar conclusions, as we were later to discover, but somehow they never quite made it to the idea of a realm of para-physical existence that was capable of both physical and ethereal manipulation of consciousness. This is the real Stargate Conspiracy.

What about Lizzies, or Reptilian type beings? When we search through the transcripts, we discover that this term first appears on September 30, 1994, after we had read Barbara Marciniak’s book Bringers of the Dawn. It was introduced by me as a sort of test question. I decided to use it to discover if the Cs would confirm or deny it as a reality. But, the fact was, I had met Reptilian types even before this – before reading Bringers of the Dawn.

In a hypnosis session with an abductee on August 3, 1994, the subject was describing her experiences during an abduction that had started out with the standard Gray aliens, but after she was taken to the place of examination, things began to get just a bit stranger:

Q: Is there anybody there with you?

A: Um-hmm.

Q: How many?

A: Oh God, this is weird. [sigh] It’s almost like I see a dinosaur or something. With little short arms … and it’s, um … it’s got funny skin … it’s like, it’s like … brownish, slickish … it’s got a real funny face … it’s like a skull but the front of the skull is like going out, real far out …

Q: Like a snout?

A: Yeah. […] It’s gone now …

Q: How tall was it?

A: Um …

Q: Taller than you?

A: Oh yeah, it looked bigger than me. It’s just funny.

Q: What’s funny?

A: Nothing, it’s gone.

Q: Where did it go.

A: I don’t know. It disappeared.

Q: What do you mean it disappeared?

A: I don’t know, it’s almost like an image. And then it just vanished.

Q: How many other beings are there with you?

A: Um … they’re all busy all over.

Q: About how many are there?

A: Um … five or six.

Q: What do they look like? Do they all look the same?

A: Oh, they’re funny looking … they’re almost like, um … they remind me of the baby dinosaur … how puffy his face was with the eyes were like … smaller … not big eyes like him … like squinty eyes …

Q: What color are their eyes?

A: Um … I don’t know … when I look at their eyes I see a green circle that keeps swirling …

This same glimpse of dinosaur- or reptilian-type beings in the background, who obviously went to great lengths to conceal their presence in abduction scenarios, was to occur a number of other times. I realized that there was something behind the Grays, that there was a higher level of authority, and it was hiding itself to a great extent. I went on a search for information about this matter, calling everyone I knew who had done any research in UFOs and abductions, asking for information about the dinosaur-type creatures. Apparently, I wasn’t the only one with clues about their existence, and there were other cases here and there that had described these critters long before Barbara Marciniak wrote her book of messages from Pleiadians.

And, so it was that, after reading Marciniak, even if I was not convinced of the way the Reptilian beings had been presented there, I certainly thought that “Lizzie” was a handy moniker for referring to what most certainly could have been terrifying creatures.

But, as noted, I had been reading a lot of literature that suggested that the Reptilian-type creatures were just a product of our perception, that had been foisted on us by ethereal beings, and that so-called aliens were strictly an ethereal manifestation of demonic-type beings. Many researchers write about them this way, and they write about prayers or rituals that can cast them out or banish them, none of which makes any sense if these beings are real in some sort of biophysical sense. I had, as the Cs pointed out, been drifting toward this ethereal-only understanding, and that is when the Cs pulled me up short to declare that there was, indeed, a real nuts-and-bolts aspect to this matter.

December 19, 1998

Q: If, at fourth density, there is variability of physicality, and the Lizzies, as you have previously said, are engineering new bodies for themselves to occupy in some sort of mass transition at the time of this realm-border crossing; in this state of variability of physicality, why do they need to engineer new bodies for themselves? Why, in point of fact, are Lizzies, Lizzies?

A: Too many questions.

Q: Why do they look like Lizards?

A: They do not.

Q: Well, why do we call them Lizard Beings? I mean, you named them that?

A: We label in accordance with your familiarity. If we had called them “Drachomonoids,” what would be your point of reference??

Q: What do they really look like?

A: You can figure as needed.

Q: You said they resemble upright alligators with humanoid features, six to eight feet tall …

A: Yes.

Q: So, why do they look like that?

A: Biology.

Q: Does biology exist at fourth density?

A: Yes.

Q: Yet, it’s a variable physical density, right?

A: Yes, but what is your assumption here?

Q: I don’t know what my assumption is. I guess that I am assuming that if it is a variable state, they could have a different biology very easily. Isn’t that the case?

A: No.

Q: Can they appear as something else? Change their physicality?

A: Temporarily.

Q: When you say “temporary,” what exactly do you mean? Temporal relates to time.

A: We have explained before that the biggest single factor regarding densities is the awareness level.

Q: The awareness level. OK, how does that relate to them only being able to temporarily change their appearance? Is this because they can control our awareness?

A: Closer. Are you not yet aware that absolutely everything, we repeat: everything is an illusion?!?

Q: At some level, yes. So, still I ask, why, in the illusion in which we exist, or in which they exist … (A) They say here that everything is an illusion, and on the other hand they say there is consciousness and matter. Everything is an illusion? Even this?

A: Yes.

Q: (A) God is also an illusion?

A: Yes.

Q: (A) Illusion to whom?

A: To those not on level 7. Your learning naturally dictates your experiences. Once you no longer require something, you naturally move beyond it. However, you retain it as a function of understanding.

Q: (A) And I am also an illusion! And understanding is also an illusion! (L) Back to my question: who created Lizzies as Lizzies? (A) Our illusion …

A: Everything is real, therefore, illusion is reality.

So, there they were: Drachomonoid beings, similar to the creatures of Arthur Clarke’s Childhood’s End. There they were, the scaley or fish gods of the ancient civilizations. And there was an “insider” telling Linda Moulton Howe that “ancient civilizations and their contacts with the [aliens] need to be considered in light of the bigger picture of the deception of mankind as a whole.” This man was telling her almost exactly what the Cs were telling us: that the gods of the ancient civilizations were false gods, that the aliens, or, more precisely, ultra-terrestrials, having time-travel capabilities, had established our religions as the foundational basis for a grand deception, a takeover of humanity, that was scheduled to be finalized in the not-too-distant future. Linda Howe had written, “One government agent told me his superiors hoped to be dead before the ‘true story’ erupted … ”

Meanwhile, Linda Howe’s informant told her that there are egotistical groups among our leaders who continue to wishfully think that they can control or manipulate the so-called aliens, when in fact, the opposite is what is really taking place. The Cs had stated precisely the same thing. The Cs had made it absolutely clear the there were forces of which we were completely unaware, and that these forces were being utilized in a “bizarre, confusing manner, designed to divert us and draw our attention from the true purpose of their actions: manipulation and deception.” What is more, the Cassiopaeans had also made it absolutely clear in their remarks about Vincent Bridges that the theories he was propagating – whether deliberately or simply because he hadn’t fully grasped the nature of the phenomenon – were part of the deception. This, too, was confirmed by Linda Howe’s informant when he stated, “People are now busy chasing ‘secret-government’ projects, satanic cults, and UFOs, while the actual perpetrating agents go unsuspected.”

At the present time, of course, we realize clearly why we have experienced so much disruption and attack from so many sources, including the Williams/Bridges gang with their nebulous connections to the same groups that are known to promote disinformation. It is because we are regularly and repeatedly pointing out that aliens are not extra-terrestrials in the sense that it is normally understood, and we are focusing on the hyperdimensional nature of the phenomenon as a real reality that has nothing to do with demons in any ethereal sense of the word. We are pointing out, again and again, the main problem in research into these matters is that there are those in the government hierarchy who are convincingly propagating false ET scenarios. In addition to the satanic-cult and government-mind-control projects variations, actively and vociferously promoted by Vincent Bridges et al., there are many others, all designed to conceal the actual perpetrating agents and deceive the public. And, of course, as noted, the ultimate diversion is the UFO abduction scenario.

Indeed, abductions are taking place. And the Cassiopaeans have given much information about these events, all of which suggest that aliens-as-extraterrestrials is extremely misleading.

And so it was that, with a growing awareness of the deceptive nature of not only our religions being created as foundations for some sort of takeover at some point in the future, I was beginning to realize that such things as the purported Holy Blood, Holy Grail secrets of Rennes-le-Château were part of this very disinformation process. How else was it possible to explain the synchronous way such a story took the world by storm? How else to explain why the obviously manufactured scenario of some sort of search for the Ark of the Covenant or the Holy Grail focused on this little French village had become the object of such frenzied speculation? It was clear that it was part of the project designed to lay the foundation for something else …

At the point in time that Vincent Bridges wrote to me, declaring himself the expert on the subject, I was utterly ecstatic to have someone to talk to about Rennes-le-Château; someone who was approaching the matter in a scholarly way, was a certified open-minded academic, author of an upcoming book on the subject, and who had responded so positively to the little clues I had put on the Ancient Wisdom egroup discussion list. I have assembled the correspondence through the next few months on the subject into separate files for the perusal of the interested reader.

When I was first introduced to this Rennes-le-Château business by RC in the fall of 1995 – though I didn’t dig into it a great deal until later – I didn’t realize what an impact it was going to have on my life. But, after the strange events of 1996 when I was so focused on the idea of an enclave of alchemists in the Pyrenees, the relationship of alchemy to the Oak Island Mystery and time travel, antigravity, and the “Shepherds of Arcadia,” at which point Ark found me (keeping in mind that he had the image of Magritte’s “Le Chateau des Pyrenees” on his website, the name Arkadiusz, and the connection of gravity waves), I sat up and paid attention. I ordered every book on the subject that I could find.

After the later strange things that emerged at the time of the Hale Bopp Flopp that turned into a mass suicide, including the bizarre increase in visitors to our little webpage, the connection between Brana and Bran and the Holy Grail, the DNA issues, the genetics research organizations, a strange connection with someone or something at Boeing coming to our site repeatedly, I also began to order and read everything on the subject of the Holy Grail that I could get my hands on.

As I have written elsewhere, like just about everybody, I enjoyed stories about knights in shining armor rescuing damsels in distress, King Arthur, and that sort of thing, as much as the next person – when I had been very young. But as I became an adult, I consigned all those things to the realm of myth and fairy tales, and had thought very little about it in the intervening years.

I had also done some research in alchemy, scrutinizing alchemical texts, but had come to the conclusion that it was just a bunch of guys who were dreaming about transmuting lead into gold, and they kept everybody going with their mysterious instructions that sounded more like the ravings of lunatics than anything else.

Now, for some reason, through the remarks of the Cassiopaeans, I was being encouraged, led, nudged, or whatever, to connect all these dots together. So, from early 1996, literally right up to the present moment, I was digging through massive amounts of research, catching up with scholars who had studied these matters all their lives rather quickly, and then leaving many of them in the dust due to the fact that the Cs were giving me clues.

To the reader who is not familiar with these subjects, much of the Cassiopaean material will make no sense at all since many of my questions are related to this mystery. The reader familiar with alchemy will be interested to note the many alchemical suggestions in relation to our mission, whatever it turns out to be:

August 31, 1996

We have helped you build your staircase one step at a time. Because you asked for it. And you asked for it because it was your destiny. We have put you in contact with those of rare ability in order for you to be able to communicate with us. Again, because you desired it, in order to realize your path. By now, you should recognize the signs … Those who display thinking patterns which in many ways deviate from that which is considered ordinary. The more unusual, the more telling. They have past lives on 3rd density earth, but not recently, but for this one. And they are not oriented to the earth frequency vibrations.

The staircase is an alchemical symbol. And it was to be brought up a time or two again, even in the symbolism of Jack and the Beanstalk, a ladder to heaven if ever there was one!

I, of course, assumed that the Cs meant Frank when they said “we have put you in contact with those of rare ability in order for you to be able to communicate with us.” But the Cs not only did not confirm that assumption, they suggested quite otherwise.

Q: (L) Are we not talking about Frank in terms of being put in contact with someone who enables me to communicate with you, so you can put me on my path, which is building the staircase, etc., etc.? Is that not what we’ve got going here?

A: He is one, but not the only one, just the one who awakened your sense of recognition.

In fact, it almost seems that they were suggesting that Terry was more important because, as was later revealed, without Terry’s presence, according to the Cs, Frank would have soon killed me with his draining. Considering the fact that the further remarks of this session related to being “hand in hand” with Ark, and that this was just a little over a month after Ark found me, it is pretty obvious that the Cs were also referring to him. In other words, the fullest communication would only occur with myself and Ark at the board. And that has proven to be stunningly correct as the reader will see when we present material from the more recent sessions in this series.

In the course of my searching of libraries and bookstores and the Internet for every scrap of information I could find on the subject of Rennes-le-Château, I came across a book entitled The Horse of God, by a Ms. Martha Neyman, a lady living in Belgium, who had devoted herself to the Rennes-le-Château mystery. She was so dedicated to it that she was even spending all her vacations there, and making friends with the residents so that they revealed to her things that might not be revealed to other people. Naturally, I was pretty excited, and inquired about her book right away. I discovered that it was only available on CD and that I would have to print it myself if I didn’t want to read it online. I sent off the money to Belgium, and a short time later, the CD arrived. In the meantime, we had kept up a lively chat by email, and I restrained myself from asking questions about the material in the book until I had a chance to read it.

All of this was in the late fall of 1998, and I only bring it up now because immediately after Vincent Bridges wrote to me, I decided that the clearest way I could explicate the development of my views on the subject of Rennes-le-Château would be to forward what I called the “Neyman Letters” to him. I figured this would save both of us time. If he thought my ideas were nuts, as Martha Neyman had, then there would simply be no further reason to discuss the matter. On the other hand, if he read the Neyman letters and thought what I had written was worth discussing, then on with the show!

So, here are the Neyman letters in order:

To Martha Neyman

Date sent: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 12:43:56 -0500

Dear Martha,

The CD arrived yesterday, but I didn’t get it until this morning and it is still printing. I was reading as I was printing and am well through the first section and have sort of scanned through the other sections.

Having spent so many years studying mythology, symbolism, comparative religion, ancient history (particularly of the Celts and the Arabs because there IS a connection between these “sons of Hagar” and the “refugees from Troy”), philology and semiotics, I can appreciate all the work you have done.

But, for me, the most significant is the fact that you have gone about and observed things and noted them down. This is important, as you know, because one must go “in the field” to get the feel.

I realized a long time ago that this Rennes-le-Château “business” was an “engineered” archetype. Those who have played parts in it have done so for reasons, though, most often, they did not even realize that they were being manipulated to say and do what they did by the “hidden superiors.” And, make no mistake about it, these beings DO exist and all the events of our lives and world are “managed” by them from behind the scenes. They create and destroy “secret societies” at will, including Templars, Priory of Sion, Masons, Rosicrucians, etc. These are all “covers” and “smoke screens.” And, they have existed, in a continuous line, for many thousands of years.

For this reason, the sequence of events that you have so rationally described, regarding the main players in this “drama” is most important to me. It fit with some of my own assessments which I had already made about Saunier and Boudet and Bigou.

There is a “rule” of espionage which goes: observe the facts, ONLY the facts, and extrapolate backwards to discover WHO benefits from a given situation, and this will give you the key to the underlying truth.

Well, I have been doing this about the events of history and geography for most of my adult life. The world, in its broadest sense, is a projection, if you will, similar to the shadows on Plato’s cave. We cannot know fully the origins of these “shadow” images unless we can overcome our fascination with the moving patterns and leave the cave. But, doing that implies that we must first be aware that we CAN leave the cave …

As I said, this business is an “engineered archetype.” Rather, it is a holographic projection of a much larger drama. But, figuring out the small scale mystery is the key to projecting the template onto a larger landscape. It does not end, or even begin, in Southern France.

Now, there are certain “key points” on the planet which I have discovered … with strange names and numbers … and “temple” characteristics (in the original sense of the word) that are, apparently, veiled from the awareness of others thus far. There are symbolic and semiotic and philological connections of a substrata of “events” that stagger the mind.

The one thing that few people think about is “WHO IS DOING ALL THIS?” And, connected to this is: what are their capabilities? And this is most important. If I, for one instant, underestimate the capabilities of “them,” I will surely be devoured.

It is in this lack of realization of who holds the secrets and the intellect behind it that causes most people to stumble and fall in their analysis.

And since I am convinced it is an EPOCHAL secret which involves the history of mankind, the moving and changing of large masses of energy on the planet itself, then I HAVE to think about the “figures” behind such a thing.

One example I will mention … you remember what you wrote about St. Anthony’s day … January 17 … and the number nine … and all that. It is reasonable based on what is available … but there are meanings even older than that … and they pop up in Mayan constructs … I was in Mexico last year and came across a figure carved in what was once a bas relief of a Mayan temple … It was a figure of a man with the flesh removed from his thighs and skull … but with the rest of his body intact … and his legs were crossed … I have an excellent photo of it which I have shared with a few people. I’m sure you recognize the symbol …

And there is the ancient cult of Janus – guardian of the door – to whom January 17 was sacred … and there was the celebration of St. Augustine on the same day … and there is the hermit in the grail stories … whose hero is Perceval … “he who pierces the valley,” or “mummy with the long member,” or “pour suivant … ” and so on; take your pick.

Well, let me get back to having a look at this business.

Laura

After reading Martha’s book, which began in so promising a way, I was depressed to discover that she had fallen into the same trap as every other researcher. She was certain that she had discovered something new, but so were all of the other researchers who had written books on the subject. They would arrive on the scene, full of the information they had collected from the written sources, they had a theory, and yep – sure enough – their theory would be confirmed by amazing new discoveries. Over and over again this scenario played out, in book after book, with each investigator certain that his was the answer to end all answers. I immediately recognized the high strangeness factor of the UFO/alien abduction phenomenon. There was hyperdimensional manipulation going on here, for sure. And a careful reading of Henry Lincoln’s book, The Key to the Sacred Pattern, will reveal this most clearly.

Seeing that Martha had done the same thing, that she had used the same types of sources, that she had been led through a series of hyperdimensional hoops, I didn’t really know how to tell her that I could instantly see that she had been manipulated by those time-traveling, mind-marauding controllers of our reality. I didn’t want to rain on her parade, and I knew that it would be almost impossible for me to discuss it with her because, like everyone else who is hot on the trail of a bunch of synchronicities, there is nothing you can tell them that will convince them that they might be being manipulated by hyperdimensional forces. It’s a damned unpleasant thought for anyone, much less someone who hasn’t probed into the belly of the beast.

But Martha wrote again and asked, and I tried to break it to her gently:

To: Martha Neyman

On 24 Nov 98, at 17:33, Martha Neyman wrote:

> I never heard from you again, I hope everything is fine … ?

Yes. Thank you for asking. We are preparing for the big “Thanksgiving” holiday … second only to Christmas in its excessive consumption of calories and fat! I have a 22 pound turkey in my refrigerator and stacks of ingredients for pies and cakes … ready for the baking tomorrow. I swore I wasn’t going to do this anymore, but the children would be devastated if I didn’t. Ark is happy to eat yogurt and be done with it … and I don’t need anything at all except to stop eating for about a year …

> By now you might have finished reading my book, I think … 

Yes. And lots of marginal notes …

> As you are so well experienced in the subject of symbolism and know so much more then I do, I would appreciate it very much if you could let me have your opinion … 

I am impressed with what you have done, having started with more or less a blank screen. You have had the unique advantage of “being there,” which I have not … but, yes, there is a LOT I would like to discuss and I have been debating how open you would be to this “putting two heads together” on the subject. I know that I am like a mother about anything I write and very sensitive to what might be construed as “criticism,” so I have not wanted to say anything that would be offensive. But, at the same time, you are THERE and can answer some questions I have and I think that there are some things that need further work.

> How is the weather in your country … ? Here in Belgium temperature is minus 13° centigrade … However that was not too bad, because the sun was shining and the cold itself was not unpleasant … But the weather is changing tomorrow, rain is expected and the streets will turn into skating-rinks … We stay indoors, that is much safer I think and in any case good for a whole day of writing … 

My husband has been invited to Brussels by some company that is probably connected to NATO … they want to pay expenses and all that … we don’t yet know how we will respond. As he says, it makes the drama of our life a little more interesting even if we don’t follow the “script.”

If you are ready to have a little dialogue about this “Rennes etc.” business, well, tell me. What I want to do is something like what my husband does … you get a theory, you build the structure, you see how it behaves as a “working hypothesis,” and if there are problems, you tear it apart and start over. That sort of thing is what he does. He will have an idea, spend weeks on page after page of mathematical calculations and then hit a brick wall and have to start all over again.

We sat up one night and analyzed, in a sort of “hard science” way the evidence of the “phenomenon” of Rennes … it was an interesting exercise with interesting “conclusions.” I was thinking at the time that it was too bad you weren’t with us as there were a lot of questions we had no answers to because we did not have the opportunity for personal investigation or observation.

I will say that some of the things you have found are fascinating and I am convinced that there is some purpose and reason, and maybe even your ultimate conclusions are correct – or pretty close … but there are some big gaps in the symbolic appreciation and historical background of same. This is something of a specialty of mine. I have spent so much time buried in these “old times” that I can “shift” into them and think like them.

And, there is also what I call my “Grail File,” which consists of all the remarks and clues given via channeling on this specific subject. It was pretty astonishing that, just a few days before your CD arrived, I had been pressing the subject and was given some information that was right there on your pages … I nearly dropped my teeth! though I don’t think you were aware of the significance of certain things you found … you were focused in another direction!

So, the result is that I am convinced, like you, that there is some great mystery to be solved … but I am not as sure as you are that your answers are the “right ones.” There are many things to be gone over in a sort of “cold” and analytical way – even including this business of “synchronicity” that we both have experienced in this matter.

This “amazing” confluence of “clues and artifacts” tends to convince us that our ideas are correct … but I have found that, often, the matter is much more complicated – like a chess game. Some of these “synchronous” events are like a move on the chess board by these “unknowns” and they are waiting to see if we will see through the ruse … We can either make the mistake of “falling into the trap” of taking the piece “offered” while we are being set up for a swift and stunning mate.

NEVER underestimate the cleverness and cunning of the opponent.

Your ideas are framed in much the same terms as the guys who wrote the Holy Grail series and the guy who wrote the Tomb of God … in the sense that all sorts of “synchronous” and “amazing” correspondences were found in response to the various ideas had by all. This should be taken as a warning that it can occur to just about anybody. All of you were convinced that you were “on the right track” because of these things … don’t forget that. They, as sincerely as yourself, were convinced of the “rightness” of their “path” and conclusions because of the SAME TYPES OF REMARKABLE SYNCHRONICITIES!!!!

And, for an “outsider” who has not been there … one is left with a welter of “confusing” and contradictory ideas.

So, this is why I think that it is at this point that all must be torn apart and looked at with a somewhat different and more “playful” idea. Remember – NEVER FORGET – that the opponent wants us to come to false conclusions … And never forget that he/they are so much more clever and practiced at this deception that we can even imagine. This is NOT a secret of a couple hundred years duration. It is THOUSANDS of years old …

Anyway, enough of this rambling. If you like, if you are prepared to play with it, to tear it apart with me for the sake of possibly solving it … admitting in the beginning that your solution may turn out to be correct or not … but maybe for different reasons … then maybe there is some hope of solving it. With material results.

Do you want to begin?

Laura

After I had sent the above, I realized that I really needed to be more open about what was on my mind. I didn’t want to have the poor woman thinking I was critical of her writing, which was not the case.

To: Martha Neyman

Date sent: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 22:03:37 -0500

Dear Martha,

Perhaps it will give you a better idea of how I am thinking if I address some of your book before you decide if you want to “discuss” it.

Remember, this is all “thinking out loud,” so to speak, or on paper. It is just a “scenario” to be tried and tested. I don’t pretend that it is the “bottom line.” So, here goes:

On page 4 you talk about the BBC documentary where the media, which had once “touted” the “mystery,” now has pretty much squashed it. You ask a very good question: Why murder a good story?

Well, perhaps, at this point in time, they were NOT murdering a good story because there were already so many adherents to it, that it would be impossible to do so … it was just more controversy. In fact, this move could have been designed to make people ask the very question you did … sort of like the government constantly pooh poohing UFOs … the more they did, the more people believed they were hiding something.

So, this IS a valid point considering “double and triple reverse psychology” commonly in use by the media and whoever runs it.

So, I think that your question goes much deeper than you think.

But, it also puts light in another area … it seems that, these guys who were making money off of this business were being manipulated from start to finish. And making money was, apparently, not the objective – though for them it might have been a lure. Or it might have started for them as a lure, or a farce … and grew very serious later.

Nevertheless, we may deduce that the objective of this pronouncement by the BBC was to do the exact opposite … to breathe new life into the subject by reverse psychology.

So, question about this now is: why? Why do they WANT to keep attention on this area? Why was the attention drawn here to begin with?

Now, let’s skip to page 17 where you list the “facts” which can be substantiated and back engineer a bit from there.

The three “facts” – Documents were found in 1886.

We cannot accept this as a fact. It is only hearsay. No matter about the various arguments for, about, against, or whatever, no one, NO ONE, outside of persons whose credibility is in question has EVER SEEN any actual, ancient or even “pretty old” MSS. They have not been submitted to any kind of professional analysis because they have never been produced. To say that “The discovery of the manuscripts is the key to the mystery of Rennes-le- Chateau,” is a huge assumption.

So, let’s set them aside for the moment. (Don’t despair, I am ruthless, but it is useful, as you will see.)

Third fact (we will save the second for last, as it is the most interesting.) – That Saunier was digging at night in the cemetery without obvious purpose, aided by his servant.

Now, on this, what verification is there? I am not too clear from the various stories … but it seems that the primary source of this information was an old guy who “remembered” all this many years later … and, considering the circumstances of all the rest … well, it is hearsay. Not admissible as a fact.

Now, there is the second “fact,” that Saunier spent more money than his income as a village priest allowed.

At last, we are on firm footing. There are ledger books, apparently, with this information recorded that can be considered “hard evidence.” And, there is the evidence of the building projects and so forth which cost more money than the guy could have made. We have a FACT. Only one, so far.

Remember, our BELIEFS are not important here … our feelings, our responses to our amazing “synchronicities,” and all that. We have to clear away the fog of emotion.

Now, in order to know what other “facts” there may be, maybe you can answer the following questions?

You wrote: In 1892, Sauniere is often absent without permission. What he does and where he goes, remains a secret …

Says WHO?

You wrote: In 1894, together with Marie he makes long walks. They collect stones that are used to adorn the garden with a grotto.

Says WHO?

You wrote: Also in 1894, aided by his trustworthy helpmate, Marie, he starts to dig in his cemetery! At night, under the cover of darkness …

Says WHO?

Now, the tomb of Marie Negre D’Ables, that he is supposed to have destroyed, but, fantastically, it happened to have been “copied” … are you aware of the investigation into the “background” of that little book where it was supposedly reproduced? That it was, very likely, at the hands of the very same persons who deposited the “Dossiers Secrets” and all that in the Biblioteque Nationale?

This is pretty shaky stuff here.

The very idea that the Abbe was “searching for something” could be all rumor.

But, why? Where could such a rumor come from?

The story about Marie in her old age is highly instructive: I am sure you have a few “old people” in your family and are familiar with their little “manipulations” and feelings of “helplessness” as they age.

Now, just suppose there WAS some secret of the Abbe … but it had NOTHING to do with a “treasure” at all … and whatever it was, died with him as a source of income.

But, Marie, in her old age, desperate to ensure her comfort, knowing that all she has is this property that is expensive to maintain, and no money coming in anymore, hints to the people who have undertaken to care for her that there is a “secret” that she will tell them before she dies … Obviously, this is to keep her “control” over her life to what little extent she can. It sounds like the old “if you are nice to me, I’ll remember you in my will,” routine so common among old people … From the descriptions I have heard, the people who were caring for her had a hard time making ends meet. Do you think that if she had some secret that would enable access to financial aid, that she would not have acted upon it herself and thereby enabled herself to PAY for her own care in old age, rather than having to depend on strangers that she controlled with the promise of a secret?

It is so typical of something an old lady would do, that I am completely struck by the likelihood of it being so.

But, what happens? She dies without telling anything! Supposedly. Well, the guy spends some time looking for a possible treasure which he hopes is there … because the old lady told him so … but, no luck … maybe he realizes that he was duped … and the story you have described, about the hints to the papers about a treasure to create business for a hotel … well, the guy was just playing with the cards he was dealt, and I believe that this is the source of the whole “Rennes-le-Château” cottage industry in “treasure hunting.”

BUT, that STILL DOES NOT EXPLAIN THE ABBE’S MONEY!

Okay, the guy had some bucks. Not only that, but his bishop had some bucks … and both were getting paid by another priest … and, not only that, there was a third priest who was murdered.

These FACTS are of EXTREME interest! The rest is just rumor, smokescreen, hearsay, and all that.

Now, clearly, as you have revealed to me, the cash flow came from Henri Boudet who wrote the strange book about language … (and I would very much like to get my hands on a copy of it complete! There may, indeed, be a code in there … but not what anybody thinks … )

Now, on pages 19, 20 and 21 you give some very interesting facts OUT OF SEQUENCE. I wonder if it was a subconscious oversight? Because, placing them IN SEQUENCE makes for very interesting reading: Here they are:

1852, Sauniere is born.

1878, The abbe of Rennes, Pons, dies.

1881, Charles Mocquin is appointed, but leaves after just a few months. (Any reason given for his leaving???)

1885, May 5, Antoine Croc leaves Rennes … (When was he appointed? How long was he there? This is curious. Any reason given for leaving?) Two priests in a short time, appointed, and then leave??? Did anybody ask why???

1885, July 1, Sauniere is appointed cure at Rennes …

1886, Sauniere purportedly receives a “gift of cash from Comtesse de Chambord.” (Or was it really a “first payment” from Boudet? We see that Sauniere isn’t going to leave after just a few months … wonder why? The previous two priests left pretty quick.)

1886, According to the ledgers you cite, it was at about this time that Abbe Boudet began paying money to Sauniere. Was this also the time he began paying money to Mrs. Billard in Carcassonne? Any dates on this? The bishop was getting twice as much as Sauniere according to the figures you gave. Was it for the same period? The bishop gave most of his to charity. (Was this because of a guilty conscience?)

1887, July, the new altar is placed in the church at Rennes. This is curious. Was this a completely NEW altar, or was it a re-placing of the old one? If the former, what happened to the OLD one?

1889, Bishop Felix Billard visits Rennes for the first time … (There may have been some sort of “meeting” amongst these guys. They discuss who is to get what, who is to do what, and so on … )

1891, major restoration is begun on the church … (This does not sound too strange, since there is obviously some source of money – Sauniere bargained for enough to make his church the way he wanted. If he is stuck in this out of the way place, he is gonna enjoy it!)

1891, Sept 21, entry in Sauniere’s diary – “letter from Granes – discovery of a sepulchral vault, rain in the evening.” (Does not sound like anything unusual since he is doing a major restoration on his church. AND, he does not seem too interested in it since he did not list it first.)

1892, hearsay that Sauniere was absent without permission. (unless there are documents to confirm this)

1894, hearsay, unless documented, collecting of stones for grotto.

1894, hearsay, unless documented, digging in graveyard.

1896, restoration of church mostly finished. Sauniere buys more land.

1897, June 6, Mgr Billard visits and the garden is unveiled. (Perhaps another “meeting” between the “guys” takes place now.)

1897, Abbe Gelis was murdered. Reportedly tortured before his death. Was supposed to retire the next day. The magistrate found money hidden at various places in the vicarage … so, he may have been on the “payroll” as well or … He was an intimate of Sauniere and Boudet and had been there since 1857. How long was Boudet in the region? Was Gelis the “source” of the money to Boudet? He had been there a long time … he was going to retire … perhaps take the secret of the source of income with him, or threatened to do something else at the meeting … or, being retired, he would have been a threat in some way. This needs more examination.

1898, One year after the death of Abbe Gelis, Sauniere buys the land on which he builds his villa. Doesn’t anybody find this odd?

1902, the Bishop dies.

1902, Sauniere was told to give an explanation on the origin of his wealth to the new bishop … Seems that the old bishop was “protecting” the other “guys” in some way, so it does not seem that it could be a “secret” of the church or the church would continue to preserve it …

1902, Sauniere argues with his friend Henri Boudet. The friendly relations between Sauniere and Boudet are broken off … Funny that this comes right after the Bishop dies and the new one demands explanation. This is the strangest thing of all. If there is some secret between them and Sauniere is under pressure to reveal it, it does not seem very wise for Boudet to break off relations with Sauniere if Sauniere KNOWS something about Boudet that he could tell. This point needs some consideration. Something funny here.

1910, July 23, Sauniere is suspended from his official duties. Seems that if Boudet was worried that Sauniere would reveal something, he would come to his rescue. What was happening to Boudet at this time? Was he getting along just fine, or was he being questioned also?

1915, Boudet sends a message to Sauniere to meet and reconcile … shortly after the reconciliation, Boudet dies. This is funny, that Boudet sends this message … is it documented? Or, is it documented BY Sauniere? Did he go to visit Boudet uninvited? How soon after the visit does Boudet die? Five years of no contact, then Boudet sees Sauniere and dies right after????

1916, Sauniere decides to build on a REALLY grand scale … Exactly one year after the death of Boudet. Strange that he has done this twice … A year after the death of another priest, Sauniere embarks on more building projects.

1917, January 22, Sauniere dies suddenly.

Now, of all the interesting facts above, the two that strike me most forcibly are the facts that, in the year following the death of Gelis, Sauniere buys the land on which he plans to build his villa – but holds off the building for three years … and in the year following the death of Boudet, Sauniere decides to really go “whole hog” with his building projects …

So, what we have, after getting rid of the story of the parchments, treasure and all that mess … is still a VERY strange story …

AND, it seems to me, that once certain attention had been brought to the area due to the financial needs of Mr. Corbu and family, there was a DESPERATE need to confuse the issue … to draw attention away from the situation involving the priests … and their friendship and their finances.

The question would be WHY would this be so important at such a remove in time? Evidence indicates that it is NOT a secret of the church … the “treasure” idea is kaput, too, as far as I can see … all the elements of the “Shepherds of Arcadia” painting as related to this area have pretty much been shown to be “cooked up.” But, there IS something going on!!!

Is there a connection between the facts that Abbe Gelis was murdered and Sauniere bought land for his villa soon after?

Is there a connection between the fact that Boudet died “suddenly” and Sauniere made big plans to build soon after?

What could be the REAL source of money being shared among these guys? Two, possibly THREE priests and a bishop …

Was Sauniere’s sudden death natural, considering the funny business around the deaths of the other two?

What or who was it that supplied the money? Obviously, Sauniere had access to it after Boudet died, but NOT when he and Boudet were on bad terms … hmmmm? Funny? What was the connection of Gelis to the money – so that he had to die for it, as it seems?

But, whatever the source, it was NOT accessible to Marie … She only used the suggestion of a “secret” as bait to ensure her well-being until death …

So, having ripped away all the smokescreen, we are left with a real mystery. But nothing at all like what all the “researchers” suggest.

But, that is not to say that there is not some purpose in the smokescreen, that is another subject altogether. There IS some great mystery about the Shepherds of Arcadia, but, it may be far wider and more intriguing than just the area around Rennes-le-Château.

But, this is enough for now.

Laura

Along with the last of the Neyman letters that I forwarded to Vincent Bridges, I wrote some comments:

To: Vincent Bridges

Date sent: Fri, 7 May 1999 17:01:33 -0400

This is the last of the Neyman letters … after this, she wrote and told me she did not see any point in “discussing” it further as she KNEW the truth because she had been “led” by “amazing synchronicities” and all that. Same song, different verse.

My point is: I can see that there is a HUGE thing going on here … and it seems that everybody, including yours truly, has had so amazing a series of “confirmations” of ideas – one leading to another … and work, work, work on the research and digging and all that … BUT each one has come to a somewhat different conclusion and has been led down a somewhat different path.

I want to get to the very bottom of the blasted thing!

I have some pieces to this pie, I think … and Martha found some interesting things … and I am still waiting for my printer to finish your pages so I can settle down and read and see what pieces you have found …

Anyway, this will give you SOME idea of how I am looking at it. I am a strange mixture of “intuitive” and ruthlessly scientific – even toward myself. And, when I get emotionally attached to my ideas, my husband straightens me out pretty quick!

I guess I have a couple of axioms I live by: one is “get results.” The other is: “when all the lies are stripped away, what remains is the truth.”

 

To Martha Neyman

Date sent: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 13:23:49 -0500

On 25 Nov 98, at 16:26, Martha Neyman wrote:

> You are a busy lady … When is the big “Thanksgiving” day..? I thought this was the 14th of November, but I am not sure and you know better..!

In USA it is the last Thursday in November – whatever that happens to be. Don’t know why they picked a Thursday … all sorts of symbolic things about Thor and all that could come to mind, but …

> Sounds great and finger-licking good that turkey of yours … Today for us; a bit sliced cabbage will do, we have to watch our diet … 

So do we … which is why it is going to be difficult … I will be sick if I eat things that I ought not to eat!

> Of course I will answer the questions you have and I do not see this as a criticism of the work I did, because I feel, what I did was good and not done before by anyone … Even not by the writers of the Tomb of God … The book they wrote, has at first sight a “certain” resemblance with my work, but it is totally different and the “Horse of God” is not a railway, that is for sure..!

Precisely. It is such a vast subject, that it is difficult to get into without writing reams. The very important thing you were doing was just going about with an open mind and observing and checking things out.

Yes, the railway part nearly had me laughing off my chair. And those poor guys missed some of the most amazing clues …

> Dear Laura, do not be angry with me because I am honest to you and straight to the point … In a way, I am thinking in the same direction as you … 

Only way it can all be solved …

> I think, where you talk about WHY the BBC is “murdering” the story of RLC, you dig too deep. I can well imagine the US government keeping the truth about UFO’s from the people, but to believe that the respectable BBC of England is part of a plot to hide the truth of Rennes-le-Château in a sort of double psychology game, I think is going a bit too far.

Possibly. It is all too easy to get into a conspiracy mind-set. But, you DID ask the question, and I could see that there was another answer besides these guys just tossing the whole thing out the window.

> You asked me a lot of questions … But … You started to ask questions about the “Preface” and the “Introduction”.

Yes. There are certain foundational facts that I think are necessary. You gave quite a few that I have not noticed in other works … so, I am asking for more about the “basic story.”

> Please take “This” information at “face value”..! This section is not of any importance to the rest of my book. The information in the introduction is common knowledge, mostly it came from the locals, and they are used by every book-writer … 

Yes, I know that – but, I want to know WHY and HOW such things were generated. I want to know if anybody ever actually documented any of these things. And these are questions that DO occur to me for whatever reason. If the only answer is “the locals said so … ” well, that IS the answer. If there is an old diary where someone wrote about it, that is a different kind of answer.

And, the point is: somehow, for some reason, stimulated by some “raison,” these so-called Priory of Sion fellows played on this story and the painting (which I believe is important because of the facts of Poussin’s life) got connected to this area … Is it because there was some sort of “rumor” that floated about in esoteric circles that this painting was connected to this place? Who came up with the idea in the first place?

> When you start writing some kind of a book, you have to start somewhere … 

Oh, indeed. And getting from point A to point B is very difficult because there are so many corollary paths that might need to be included that it becomes an agony deciding how to choose what to include and what to leave out – or it could become so lengthy and confusing that no one could understand it! Believe me, I KNOW.

> I do not have to tell you … I did start with general information. So readers who are not so well informed, but want to know more about the whole story Rennes-le-Château, can get this general information.

Yes, but you also did some “investigating” on your own. You observed. A lot of things you mention are not mentioned by other writers, even apart from your discoveries.

> That is why, in the INTRODUCTION, I wrote: Quote: At the risk of boring those readers, who know all about the history of Rennes-le-Château and its obstinate priest, I would like to repeat briefly, the “original” version, for those new to the story … Unquote.

Yes, but hopefully, you checked some of these things???? After all, the previous writers may have had an agenda … and it seems that they did not check things out as thoroughly as one might wish.

> Dear Laura, those inverted commas at the word ORIGINAL were placed there on purpose … To the real initiated it means the story as it is usually told, as mysterious and uncanny as possible, without actually having completely checked out, who did what and why and who saw him doing it … This is just the “common” Rennes-le-Château story, only meant as “proof” that something weird was going on in this village and that the priest behaved strangely … 

Yes, but if none of those things are true … if they only “developed” AFTER the fact of the initial “rumor” of treasure was started, which I think you pinpointed in your description of the folks who were caring for Marie, well, then there is nothing to support the “treasure” hypothesis. There is nothing to look for … at least not in that sense.

Thus, if the story about treasure, the connection to the painting, which seems to have evolved from the rumors about treasure, all are “manufactured,” then one has to start looking in a different way.

> Because as you will find out later, as you read on, you will see that Sauniere’s doings have (very) little impact on the solution I found.

But, Sauniere’s doings seem to be the very thing that the “story” masks … My point is that the story seems to be a smokescreen for what was going on with those priests.

I can see that I am going to have to start telling you about some of the things I discovered … in much the same way you discovered things … in this way you will understand that I am saying that there is SOMETHING HUGE going on here, because what I have discovered dovetails with your “findings” only there are some other implications and correspondences that make the picture a lot larger …

> I hope you do not mind, I am so straight to the point..?

No. This has got to be analyzed to pieces I think.

> What I meant by writing : You are so well informed is: Experienced in symbolism … 

We will get to that later. I cannot formulate without data. There are some significant symbolic images that are far more ancient and “in your face” in that painting than what you described. Every thing has multiple layers … question is: which layer do we extract from?

An example is your use of the “knee” as a means of selecting the number “seven.” Well, the knee has some very deep meanings and is used symbolically in a rather different way in numerous sources, the oldest I have found being the Egyptian Pyramid Texts … And it is not chance that “knee” is from the same root as “knead (as in bread), knight, juga, yogi, conjugal, genes, genetic, gonads, etc.)

Also, the hand positions … there was in use, at the time of the painting, a “hand alphabet” which could signify either letters or numbers or both … it could also symbolize a mathematical “operation.”

> I started to give an explanation of the perceptible and searching for the truth in the invisible words of symbolism in “Chapter I” … So let we [sic] start from this first part … And … Do not forget I only used A SMALL part of the Christian Church symbolism to explain, sometimes “just enough” to make clear how I came to my conclusions in a logical way..! Otherwise for most of the people “absolute unknown” with this material it would have been much too complicated, long-winded and even boring.

Agreed. But I am still trying to “connect” the painting to the area and it is difficult.

> So my dear if you are ready for it … I am … But no hurry, take your time..!

Well, it is going to take some time because the “rest of the story” is yet to be told. And, by that, I mean certain other correspondences that no one knows, I don’t think, but myself.

> This was only a short reply, because I feel the strong desire to write a whole day on my second book … Which has nothing to do with symbolism … It is the true story of the “Shepherds” the real “Shepherds”: the church-shepherds..! THAT is the story of the painting of Poussin … “Popes-Crusades-Templars”, it starts with the Oriental Schism in 1054 … For the “Latin Church of Rome” this was a large loss. It ended with a second huge loss: The reformation in 1618.

Well, if you haven’t done so already … look at the King Rene painting reproduced in the “Tomb of God” book alongside the “Shepherds” painting … just look at them casually and see what things you note that correspond … Note the lance and the horse head and compare it to the “horse head” and shepherd’s staff in the Arcadia painting … Note the position of the sun and the mountain peak in both paintings … note the posture of the Shepherdess and King Rene … note the ditch and flow of water exiting from the stone in the two paintings … note the funny leaning tree in the Rene painting … the funny hand gestures …

Then look at the Teniers painting and note the shape of the “window” and compare it to the “chink” in the tomb in the Shepherd’s painting …

Then, have a look at Bacchus and Ariadne by Titian … half-close your eyes and see what you can see … note the funny overturned vessel on the drapery … the dog … go back to Teniers and note the vessel in the window … the bird …

In the Shepherds painting, note the drapery of the figures … the crossed shins, the bared breasts of the figures … count the numbers of knees, hands displayed … Note the positions … it is not as simple as the “finger of Jupiter, Venus or whatever … ”

The system of codes being transmitted via hand signals was widespread in both the Orient and the Occident. There are allusions to it in the writings of several Greek and Latin writers, such as Plutarch, who attributes these words to orontes, son-in-law of King Artaxerxes of Persia: “Just as in calculating, fingers sometimes have a value of ten thousand and sometimes of only one, the favorites of kings may be either everything or almost nothing.” (Hmm … a connection to Persia again?)

Apuleius married a rich widow named Aemilia Pudentialla and was accused of having used magic to win her favor. He defended himself before Proconsul Claudius Maximus in the presence of Emilianus, his main accuser, who had unkindly said that Aemilia was sixty years old, when she was actually only forty. Here is the record of how Apuleius addressed his accuser:

“How dare you, Emilianus, increase the real number of Aemilia Pudentilla’s age by half, or even a third? If you had said ‘thirty’ for ‘ten’ it might have been thought that your mistake CAME FROM HOLDING YOUR FINGERS OPEN WHEN YOU SHOULD HAVE HELD THEM CURVED. But, forty is THE EASIEST NUMBER TO INDICATE, SINCE IT IS EXPRESSED WITH THE HAND OPEN.”

Saint Jerome wrote:

“Thirty corresponds to marriage, FOR THE CONJUNCTION OF THE FINGERS AS THOUGH IN A SWEET KISS REPRESENTS THE HUSBAND AND THE WIFE. […] AND THE GESTURE FOR A HUNDRED, TRANSFERRED FROM THE LEFT HAND TO THE RIGHT, ON THE SAME FINGERS, EXPRESSES ON THE RIGHT HAND THE CROWN OF VIRGINITY.”

The Venerable Bede gives many examples of how the system can be used for silent communication.

In Islamic religions, finger counting and signing was used extensively (remember the “contamination” of the Templars by Sufism … which is so similar to what is known of the Cathars that one cannot help but think that there is a connection … and, also, what is known of the Druids … )

There are a LOT of quotes I can cite about this “finger and hand” signaling system … but, it would get tedious.

The meanings of these things were obvious to people of the time, (which may be why the painting was hidden), and the citations from old MSS so common that it shows that such allusions were used both in paintings and in written references … otherwise, the readers could not have been expected to understand them, but it is very obscure to those of us in the 20th century who are not familiar with the method, and casually pass over such references as being “unimportant.”

Thus, this may be an important consideration in evaluating the message of this and other paintings.

The mathematical angles are another thing altogether. At the time, the “Golden Mean” was a standard of Art … it was taught in all the art schools that a composition based on this ratio was more aesthetically pleasing … so, pupils were taught, and masters perfected, the art of compositional placement on the medium according to the Pythagorean principles. It meant, essentially, nothing. It can be found in thousands of paintings. It’s presence in art is generally meaningless.

However, your finding of the stone with the ratio figure engraved upon it … well, that requires some examination, but not necessarily in the precise terms. Or, on the other hand, in the precise terms …

Well, I have some transcribing to do for my husband who is impatiently pacing about – and I have baking to do this afternoon. Children won’t let me NOT do it!

It will take a while to talk about all of these things and I am going to begin to try to describe to you some of the other things that may be significantly related …

Laura

As noted, Martha Neyman didn’t want to discuss it anymore. Because she had begun with assumptions about where to look – in Christian symbolism – and because she found an “answer” based on her assumptions, and the landscape more or less cooperated with her in the same way it had cooperated with so many other people, the idea that there may be something going on in this morphing landscape-treasure story as a means of screening something else, or distracting the attention of the researcher, was not a welcome idea to her at all.

What was more, the very idea that the BBC might have been manipulated rankled with her, and I knew that the idea of manipulation of reality was simply beyond her grasp. She wasn’t asking my opinion because she really wanted it; she was asking for confirmation of what she already firmly believed to be true.

I was almost too excited to wait for this Mr. Bridges to declare his opinion. I was so looking forward to discussing the issues with someone who had deeply investigated it, who had been there, and who wasn’t subject to the manipulations of the disinformation program that was evident to me. Finally, I received a response to my posts, and thank the Lord! Vincent Bridges wrote encouragingly:

Does seem as if we are working in similar directions. The stuff up on the web is actually smoke and mirrors. We haven’t released the good stuff yet either. Very little on the web about some of our discoveries, for obvious reasons. Was very interested in your Neyman letters, and yes EVB is still alive and living in the town next to RLC, but her story is truly bizarre. She was Canseliet’s lover, self identified, in the ’60s and he told her the whole story which became Refuge. It gets stranger from there. Let me know what you think and we will talk more. Fulcanelli is hard to find, but Brotherhood of Light has now published both Mystery and Dwellings of the Philosophers in English.

What startled me more than anything was learning that Fulcanelli had written a second book entitled Dwellings of the Philosophers. My mind flashed back to the Cs remark:

December 14, 1996

Q: (L) OK, let me jump over to this other subject of the number 33 and the number 11. Is there anything beyond what was given on 11-11-95, that you could add at this time, about any of the mathematics or the use of these numbers?

A: Prime numbers are the dwellings of the mystics.

Obviously, Mr. Bridges was the right one to talk to because he had pronounced the secret word! Certainly he would be able to help me to figure out the exact details of the many things the Cs had said on these subjects. I already had figured out that the alchemical transformation, or the Great Work, was simply the activation of DNA that elevated the human being to fourth density. But exactly what the precise process was, I was not yet quite sure. I figured that all I would have to do would be to just send him the excerpts of the transcripts that related to these mysterious matters, and he would be able to fill in some of the blanks. And so, I did. I sent off huge segments of the text for his review and I was gratified to receive confirmation that we were on the same track. He wrote back, “Had time to read your notes more carefully, and yep you are hot! In fact you are so close that I’m gonna tell you a couple of things that haven’t left the ‘family’ circle yet.”

He also wrote reassuringly regarding my declaration that the matter must be approached ruthlessly and scientifically:

My point of view exactly. If you knew how many true believers of all kinds I infuriate, well, as the Sufis say you can’t be a saint until 400 wise men have reviled you! I ‘believe’ I am the center of the universe, but, if I seek to prove it, then I am certifiable. Intuition must be backed up by rigorous analysis or it is just wishful thinking, like believing I’m the center of the universe.

So, all through the end of May and early June I was happily posting all my research to Vincent Bridges, and we were just having a great time. The more we discussed it, the more convinced I became, based on his comments, that he was exactly the right person to discuss these things with, and that he would have other pieces of the puzzle. Vincent wrote back about the Cs material such remarks as:

Cassiopaea as a symbol carries a very significant energy; it is the M or W in the sky and therefore is sort of a cosmic icon for the whole mystery. Is it possible that you are talking to the head masters themselves, here on earth?

I designed a true channeling check list. It’s an eleven point test, that most of the best channelers score around 3 or 4. From what I have seen of your stuff, you are around 8 or 9.

Baphomet; Do you grok what the Cs are telling you here? “Seer of the passage indeed!”

Wow, the Cs have given you the big secret and pointed out the main “treasure” to be found at RLC.

I can’t believe what I’m reading! The Cs are giving you the secret! I read this to my partner, Jay, and he freaked. I don’t think anybody but us knows this part of the secret, and to have it being broadcast psychically is a little unnerving. Combined with the alfalfa clues given earlier, you are on top of the wave. I can’t help but wonder if this is for you or for us.

Q: Did the Templars discover the secrets of the Ishmaelis, the Assassini, and is this what they carried into Europe, and then underground?

A: Buried in Galle.

OK, this one made my hair stand on end. Galle is the old word for the region around Glanum and Provence in general. We think we found just what was buried in Glanum, but it older than the Templars.

Q: Has this person also been pursuing the secret?

A: Pour suivant.

OH, boy, the real name of the Order. Whom does the Grail serve? It serves those who follow; for, to follow, is to partake of the nature of the Quest.

Jesus Laura, I can’t begin to keep up with all this stuff you are sending me! I haven’t hit a lick all week on my own work for chewing on yours. But it is so interesting!

As far as I can tell, the Cs are leading you to the same exact conclusions that we have reached. This is spooky. The session about light is plain in terms of the neuro-chemistry involved. I’m just not sure that it is getting through to you, but maybe that’s effect of spreading these clues out over time.

The interested reader may wish to peruse the correspondence for this material. There was a lot more going on in other areas at this exact time. I didn’t realize it but I was like a frog in a pan of water being slowly heated, and Vincent Bridges was one of the tools whether he knew it or not, then or since.