|
Bows
Feb 20, 2024 1:55:48 GMT -5
Post by rubyfelixir on Feb 20, 2024 1:55:48 GMT -5
There are two different ways that readers view the interior decorations of the church, and the exterior para-phernalia of the domaine, at Rennes-le-Chateau. CLASSIC CHATEAU. 1. The church renovations, the exterior buildings, and the land-scape modifications, were deliberately chosen by Fr. Sauniere, and are part of a 'treasure-hunt' that was intended by Fr. Sauniere to be solved by visitors to the village. (a). Due to changes to the church and the village caused by the passing of time, the treasure-hunt created by Fr. Sauniere can not now be solved by the public. Plantard and de Cherisey created secret parchment messages to fill-in-the-gaps with new clues, to help the public solve Fr. Sauniere's treasure-hunt. (b). Plantard and de Cherisey created secret parchment messages to impose their own meaning on Fr. Sauniere's renovations, to create their own treasure-hunt, or 'ride', at Rennes-le-Chateau, in order to promote their own organisation, and a book. An organisation with the word 'priory' in the name, and a book with a red and gold book-cover. Hmmm... That sounds familiar... DIET CHATEAU. 2. The church renovations, the exterior buildings, and the land-scape modifications, are just weird personal choices made by Fr. Sauniere, specific to him, and disconnected to each other, with no relevance to any sort of treasure-hunt. (a). The same as 1(b). Plantard and de Cherisey created secret parchment messages to impose their own meaning on Fr. Sauniere's renovations, to create their own treasure-hunt, or 'ride', at Rennes-le-Chateau, in order to promote their own organisation, and a book. Now Classic Chateau has a 1(c). BOWNARROW appears to agree with option 1, that is, Classic Chateau. However, BOWNARROW does not try to explain the puzzle of the church solely through the meaning of the decorations of the church. BOWNARROW instead claims that, similar to the actions of Plantard in 1(a), a person named LEO SCHIDLOF created a secret-message, in the form of a treasure-hunt puzzle-book titled MARANATHA, to fill-in-the-gaps with new clues, to help the public solve Fr. Sauniere's treasure-hunt. BOWNARROW interprets the oddities of the church at Rennes'le'Chateau through the lens of new clues that BOWNARROW has drawn from the MARANATHA book. QUESTIONS
Leo Schidlof died in 1966. In 1967, only one year after Leo died, the author Gérard de Sède published his own book titled 'L'Or de Rennes'. This book was re-published two years later with the title 'Le Trésor Maudit'.
Where does the puzzle-book, MARANATHA, that BOWNARROW claims was created by Leo Schidlof, fit into this time-line? Who had the puzzle-book after Leo died? Why did it take forty years for Leo's puzzle-book to be published?
|
|
|
Bows
Feb 22, 2024 11:19:02 GMT -5
Post by Bownarrow on Feb 22, 2024 11:19:02 GMT -5
Leo Schidlof was allegedly a high- ranking free mason. Duncan Burden is also a Freemason. Freemasonry seems to provide the link between the two..... Also bear in mind that Schidlof was born in 1886. With Sauniere dying in 1917, it is not entirely inconceivable that Schidlof actually met Sauniere! Also Plantard and de Chèrisey knew Schidlof....
|
|
|
Bows
Feb 23, 2024 4:19:29 GMT -5
Post by Bownarrow on Feb 23, 2024 4:19:29 GMT -5
On p 176 of Holy Blood, Holy Grail There appears the following:
As for Leo Schidlof, M.Burrus concludes ( with echoes of Freemasonry and Cathar thought), “For all who knew Henri Lobineau, who was a great voyager and a great seeker,a loyal and good man, he remains in our he earns as the symbol of a “maitre-parfait”, whom one respects and generates”
On p175 of the same book we are told that this extract comes from a letter signed by one Lionel Burrus that appeared in the Catholic Weekly of Geneva, dated October 22nd, 1966.
On the same page it states that: “In his eulogy on Schidlof he( Burrus) declares that the latter(Schidlof), under the name of Lobineau, compiled in 1956, ‘ a remarkable study...on the genealogy of the Merovingian kings and the affair of Rennes-Le-Chateau.”
The same phrase used to describe Schidlof by Burrus - great voyager ( grand voyageur in French) appears in the Aries stanza of the poem Le Serpent Rouge.
The poem Le Serpent Rouge must have been written some time in 1967 as the named authors of the poem all committed suicide in 1967.These named authors had no connection to each other, other than each committed suicide on the same day.
The phrase ‘ great voyager’ is an unusual phrase, and the fact that it was also used by Lionel Burrus in his letter dated October 22nd 1966, one week after Schidlof’s death on October 17th, suggests that the phrase in Le Serpent Rouge was copied from Burrus’ letter and not the other way round.
In Le Serpent Rouge, the ‘grand voyager’ alias Lobineau/Schidlof is connected with ‘the parchments’ - “The parchments of this friend(Schidlof) were for me the thread of Ariadne’. The implication of this statement is that Schidlof must have known about (at least) the parchments while he was still alive prior to his death in October 1966.
Ruby and many others seem to believe that Philippe de Chèrisey created the parchments and the code contained in it himself. The parchments however were first made public in Gerard de Sede’s book, L’Or de Rennes which was first published in 1967. The idea that Schidlof knew about the parchments means that he must have had access to them prior to their being made public in L’Or de Rennes, some time before he died in October 1966. If Philippe de Chèrisey created the parchments, for Schidlof to have known about them it seems reasonable to assume that some sort of connection existed between de Chèrisey and Schidlof. The most likely connection would be that they knew each other.
The more likely scenario as far as I am concerned, is that Schidlof had the original parchments since he had conducted research into the Rennes-Le-Chateau affair as early as 1956,and if Burrus’ assertion is correct, de Chèrisey, if he was involved at all, copied them from originals that were in Schidlof’s possession.
In the book ’The Priory of Sion’ by Luc Chaumeil, there is included a copy of De Cherisey’s handwritten document ‘ Pierre et Papier’ and an English translation of it. In the document de Chèrisey gives an explanation of the ‘Shepherdess...” coded message contained in the large parchment. Given the puerile absurdity of de Cherisey’s explanations it is clear that he either had no clue as to it’s true meaning or else was aware of it and was, like Duncan, simply feeding us another red herring.
|
|
|
Bows
Feb 23, 2024 5:28:10 GMT -5
Post by Bownarrow on Feb 23, 2024 5:28:10 GMT -5
QUESTIONS
Leo Schidlof died in 1966. In 1967, only one year after Leo died, the author Gérard de Sède published his own book titled 'L'Or de Rennes'. This book was re-published two years later with the title 'Le Trésor Maudit'.
Where does the puzzle-book, MARANATHA, that BOWNARROW claims was created by Leo Schidlof, fit into this time-line? Who had the puzzle-book after Leo died? Why did it take forty years for Leo's puzzle-book to be published? Ruby did raises some good questions re. the time-line of when the puzzle book was created by Schidlof, the whereabouts of the puzzle book after Leo died and why it took forty years to publish it. With regards to the first question, it is obvious that if the puzzle book was created by Schidlof, it must have been created prior to his death on October 17th, 1966. With regards the second question, that of who had the puzzle book after Schidlof died, the only thing I know for certain is that it ended up in the hands of Plantard and de Chèrisey some time in the latter half of the 1960’s. With regards to the question as to why it took forty years to publish it, all I know for certain is that the length of time was intentional. I can only offer some guesses as to why it took so long to publish the book. 1. There was an instruction attached to the puzzle to not publish it/ go public with it, similar to that of the “not until 25 years after my death” that was attached to de Cherisey’s ‘ Pierre et Papier’ document. ahttps://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/ask-the-expert-do-i-have-to-be-40-to-study-kabbalah/ 2. The puzzle is a kabbalistic type ( using gematria) puzzle. In the Jewish tradition, it is a traditional belief that one should not to be allowed to study Kabbalah until they are at least 40 years of age. 3. There might have been a copyright on the contents of the book. Generally speaking, 50 years after the authors death the copyright expires and the work falls into the public domain. There are variations though.
|
|
|
Bows
Feb 23, 2024 6:17:12 GMT -5
Post by rubyfelixir on Feb 23, 2024 6:17:12 GMT -5
I do wonder how you first came to focus on LEO SCHIDLOF. In the book 'The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail', published in paper-back by Bow-and-Arrow, sorry, ha-ha, Arrow Books, in 1996, beginning on page 182, is a discourse that seems like it could be applied to the purpose of the MARANATHA book, puzzle and treasure-hunt, and the book's publication by Priory Publications.
QUOTE There appeared to us only one plausible motivation for such a procedure - to attract public attention to certain matters, to establish credibility, to engender interest, to create a psychological climate or atmosphere that kept people waiting with bated breath for new revelations. In short, the 'Prieure documents' seemed specifically
182
calculated to 'pave the way' for some astonishing disclosure. Whatever this disclosure might eventually prove to be, it apparently dictated a prolonged process of 'softening up' - of preparing people. And whatever this disclosure might eventually prove to be, it somehow involved the Merovingian dynasty, the perpetuation of that dynasty's bloodline to the present day and a clandestine kingship. END QUOTE
As you can count by the included page number, this discourse continues from page 182 and ends on page 183.
After page 183, immediately at the top of page 184, is the following reference.
QUOTE In 1966 a curious exchange of letters occurred concerning the death of Leo Schidlof - the man who, under the pseudonym of Henri Lobineau, was at that time alleged to have composed the genealogies in some of the 'Prieure documents'. END QUOTE
Is this how you initially chose Schidlof? You jumped to page 183, a favoured puzzle number, and, looking for a clue, you then focused on the next most modern civilian to be named?
|
|
|
Bows
Feb 23, 2024 6:29:55 GMT -5
Post by Bownarrow on Feb 23, 2024 6:29:55 GMT -5
Ruby, en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Biagio_d%27Antonio_-_The_Story_of_Joseph_-_70.PB.41_-_J._Paul_Getty_Museum.jpgThe simple answer is that it was after seeing “ shield of a lion” in the painting ‘ The Story of Joseph” by Biagio Antonio, could be easily converted into the name Leo Schidlof using ‘ a lion’ -> Leo (L.) and shield -> schild(D.)
The painting in question was found as a result of trying to find a painting that matched the phrase “ He leans and prays on his staff” in the section of the text about Joseph after finding that none of the images in the book could be linked with this phrase.It was the most obvious painting where Joseph could be described as leaning and praying(kneeling) on his staff. There is however more to it than that.....
|
|
|
Bows
Feb 23, 2024 7:06:36 GMT -5
Post by rubyfelixir on Feb 23, 2024 7:06:36 GMT -5
QUOTE BOWNARROW Ruby and many others seem to believe that Philippe de Chèrisey created the parchments and the code contained in it himself. END QUOTE
My opinion of the Large Secret Message is that a Secret Message that is a 128-letter anagram of an epitaph on a head-stone in a grave-yard is sort of ridiculous.
|
|
|
Bows
Feb 28, 2024 0:11:40 GMT -5
Post by rubyfelixir on Feb 28, 2024 0:11:40 GMT -5
According to BOWNARROW in mysteriouswritings.proboards.com/thread/6730/key?page=14 THE KEY Thread The meaning of the name ANTOINE can be tumbled like a dumpling to mean CIPHER S IN The meaning of the title ABBE can be tumbled like a dumpling to mean A APPLES THE IS The meaning of the sur-name BIGOU can be tumbled like a dumpling to mean LARGE PARCHMENT The result of this process is that the name ABBE ANTOINE BIGOU means A APPLES CIPHER IS IN THE LARGE PARCHMENT
QUOTE BOWNARROW So: Abbe Antoine Bigou ->->-> Blue apples cipher is in the large parchment The above transformations give a firm link between Abbe Antoine Bigou and the ‘blue apples’ enciphered message in the large parchment. This is enough to leave me in no doubt that Abbe Antoine Bigou created the ‘blue apples’ cipher in the large parchment. Since the enciphered message is dispersed throughout the text of the parchment, it can be said that Abbe Antoine’ Bigou’s name is written all over the parchment! END QUOTE Ha-Ha-Ha! This retro-active result by BOWNARROW means that BOWNARROW believes in PRE-DESTINATION. Abbe Antoine Bigou did the thing that is the MEANING of his title and name! I do not mean that Antoine was a priest, because his title, ABBE, means that his occupation was that of a priest, or that Antoine's sur-name was that of an occupation like 'Baker' or 'Potter', and that Antoine worked as a baker or a potter. No. According to BOWNARROW, Abbe Antoine Bigou was PRE-DESTINED to create a cipher on a parchment. PRE-DESTINED to do so, from the moment that Antoine's mother married his father and she took her husband's sur-name, BIGOU, solely because of the MEANING of the SUR-NAME of the man that she married. And then Antoine was PRE-DESTINED to do so again, from the moment that his parents christianed their child with the name ANTOINE, soley because of the MEANING of the NAME that they chose to name him. Of course, Antoine had to then wait two decades until he graduated from the Catholic Church as a priest, in a country that spoke French, so he could then also be PRE-DESTINED, due to the title of his occupation, ABBE, to insert the words 'BLUE APPLES' into his cipher, because the title 'ABBE' means 'APPLES'. So Antoine was always pre-destined to become a Catholic priest in a country that spoke French, and to write not just any size parchment, but to write a LARGE parchment, because the sur-name BIGOU means 'LARGE PARCHMENT', and to write about not just any fruit, like horned melons, but about apples, because the title ABBE means 'APPLES', and not about apples of just any colour, like lime, or plum, or orange, but about apples that are blue, because... well, I do not know why. I can only assume that Destiny let Antoine exercise some Free Will and left the choice of the colour of the apples up to him. I do not know what this pre-destination means for every other ABBE working for the Catholic Church. I can only assume that while all of the abbes were pre-destined to write about apples, only the abbes known by the name of Antoine were pre-destined to write ciphers about apples.
Thus saith the Lord "Neither shall thou any more have no name, but thy name shall be Antoine, for a writer of a very large parchment have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and blue."
|
|
|
Bows
Feb 28, 2024 8:17:48 GMT -5
Post by Bownarrow on Feb 28, 2024 8:17:48 GMT -5
Ruby,
Have you considered that Bigou created the cipher so that it also could be used as a clue to the creators identity as well as a clue to the secret? Nothing to do with predestination - I haven’t a clue where you got that idea from.
The mere fact that Antoine Bigou yields ‘ Cipher in large/ big parchment’ through such a simple transformation, is one heck of a coincidence. The fact that the ‘apples’ can be introduced into the equation through the addition of his title ‘Abbe’ is more remarkable still. The chances that these equations are mere coincidence seems way too remote for it to be mere coincidence.
The cipher utilises the inscriptions on the tomb of Marie de Negre d’Ables . Abbe Bigou in all probability also composed these.It seems to me that anagrams and different languages are a perfectly obvious way to hide your identity as the composer of the enciphered message. This is far more believable for me than the nonsense written by de Cherisey in his explanation of the cipher or any of the other explanations I have seen for the meaning of the cipher and it’s creator.
Incidentally:
Antoine -> notae in -> cipher in ( not ‘cipher s in’ - Since it is ‘notae’, the plural of ‘nota’,not ‘nota’, singular, that translates as ‘cipher’.
The fact that ‘Bigou’ can be correlated with ‘large/big parchment’ also provides an explanation as to why the two parchments are different sizes.
|
|
|
Bows
Feb 28, 2024 11:13:28 GMT -5
Post by rubyfelixir on Feb 28, 2024 11:13:28 GMT -5
So... what, then? Fr. Bigou was in the presbytery, sitting on a chair, leaning on a table with one elbow, his head resting against his hand, and he was like, "What should I do? What is my purpose? What is my destiny? Wait... I know! God knows every-thing, and maybe... maybe the Lord left me a clue. In my name! People in the Old Testament always have a clue in their name that tells them what great deeds they will achieve! Yes!" Fr. Bigou slaps the table-top with his hand. "I will try to decipher the meaning of my own name! Let's see now... BIGOU means... dum-dee-dum-daa... a large parchment!" Fr. Bigou raises an arm and points an index finger towards the ceiling of the presbytery, and makes an announcement. "I shall write... a large parchment!" Fr. Bigou lowers his arm. Fr. Bigou continues. "And the name ANTOINE means... waaaait-waaaait... a cipher!" This time Fr. Bigou stands, and raises an arm, and points an index finger towards the ceiling, and makes an announcement. "I shall write... a cipher! On a large parchment!" Fr. Bigou lowers his arm. "And people will know that I wrote it, because the people will say "That is a cipher, on a large parchment, and the word cipher means the name Antoine, and a large parchment is a Bigou! Antoine Bigou wrote that cipher on that large parchment!" Fr. Bigou sits back down on the chair. "Huh. Well, to be honest, I don't want to write a cipher on a large parchment. But, with a name like mine, it would be a waste not to!" Fr. Bigou crosses his arms and rests his elbows on the table. "Now, what should I write the cipher about?" Fr. Bigou looks at a fruit-bowl on the table. One green pear is in the bowl. "Who ate all the apples?"
|
|
|
Bows
Mar 1, 2024 0:25:48 GMT -5
Post by rubyfelixir on Mar 1, 2024 0:25:48 GMT -5
QUOTE BOWNARROW The more likely scenario as far as I am concerned, is that Schidlof had the original parchments since he had conducted research into the Rennes-Le-Chateau affair as early as 1956,and if Burrus’ assertion is correct, de Chèrisey, if he was involved at all, copied them from originals that were in Schidlof’s possession. END QUOTE
I agree that the current parchments are copies of original parchments, copies that were made so that they could be published in the book 'L'Or de Rennes' and 'Le Trésor Maudit'. If you have an original document, a message, or a map, that reveals a secret location, that is information that is of value to the owner of that document, as that information gives the owner of that document significant leverage in any interaction with any other persons interested in finding that secret location. Making that information public by publishing the original document would mean that the owner of that document would lose that leverage. If the owner of the document wishes to advertise that they have a document, and prove that they do have an original document with information that is of value to other persons, then that owner would publish only a redacted form of the document. This, as an example, happens in the case of old buried-treasure maps, where the owner of the map freely admits that they have removed certain information from the map before publishing the map, or perhaps a ciphered message, publicly. Sometimes, the owner does not admit that they have in truth redacted part of, or made changes to, the published document, but 'mistakes', or omissions in the published document, that appear to halt further progress in solving the document, without the direct involvement of the owner of the document, as in solving the location, or even the identity, of an island on a map, or the meaning of a deciphered message, reveal that the document has been altered so that it can be published by the owner without completely giving away the owner's special leverage. If you doubt my claim, then I ask the reader to think how they themselves would publish a document that contained special information, to prove that they had such a document, without also making all of the special information in that document available to every other person by publishing that document.
|
|
|
Bows
Mar 3, 2024 10:29:16 GMT -5
Post by rubyfelixir on Mar 3, 2024 10:29:16 GMT -5
The Small Parchment. Junk, or what? It hits a buzz-word, SION, and also has concealed in its Latin text, a French message telling you that KING DAGOBERT II, a king that last ruled a kingdom over 1,300 years ago, is DEAD. By the way, this king died in a forest located north-noth-east of Rennes-le-Chateau, 999 KM away from Rennes-le-Chateau. Is this death useful information to conceal in a text on a parchment found at Rennes-le-Chateau?
As the country of France extends 962 KM North-to-South, and 950 KM East-to-West, the Small Parchment appears to be an attempt to send people away from Rennes-le-Chateau, to a location that is literally on the opposite side of France! Stenay is further away from Rennes-le-Chateau than Paris is, and, in distance, Stenay is closer to Berlin in Germany, a country that is just over the border, than Stenay is to Rennes-le-Chateau.
|
|
|
Bows
Mar 4, 2024 11:31:39 GMT -5
Post by rubyfelixir on Mar 4, 2024 11:31:39 GMT -5
The agitprop of the Prieuré de Sion attracted readers, that is, paying tourists, to Rennes-le-Chateau, through the publication of a book about Rennes-le-Chateau. That book contains a facsimile of a Large Parchment, and a facsimile of a Small Parchment. The Small Parchment has a Secret Message that is in French, that can be easily discovered and read by the French reader. It is odd then that, in a book about Rennes-le-Chateau, the content of the Small Parchment Secret Message would send the reader of the book, that is, the paying tourist, away from the village of Rennes-le-Chateau, to the town of Stenay. If a reader read this book anywhere-else but in Rennes-le-Chateau, there is now no reason to travel to Rennes-le-Chateau. This re-routing suggests that, despite the legend of the treasure, there is nothing now of interest for the Prieure at Rennes-le-Chateau, and the next really important location is Stenay. Did the town of Stenay pay the Prieure to publish a book that would hi-jack the tourism from Paris to Rennes-le-Chateau and re-route that tourism from Paris to Stenay? If you find this unlikely, then just consider a modern example. Think of all of the tourism that the best-selling novel 'The Da Vinci Code' generated for the locations in Paris that were used in that novel. Another Prieure agitprop was put in the national library in Paris to be read by the public. A mad, blank dossier. This dossier has in it, DECODED, in plain French, the SECRET MESSAGE that was encrypted and hidden in the text of the LARGE PARCHMENT that was discovered at Rennes-le-Chateau! This dossier, and that decoded Secret Message, was placed in the national library in Paris TWO YEARS before the Prieure book was published. Yet, while a facsimile of the Large Parchment was published in the Prieure book, the Secret Message in the Large Parchment was NOT noted, nor decoded, and not published, in that book! The text of the decoded Large Parchment Secret Message names two popular historical painters, POUSSIN and TENIERS, both of whom have works of art hanging in the national art museum that is in... hmmm... Paris! If a reader lived in Paris, and they went to the national library there and read the dossier, before the book was published, or before that reader read that book, then that reader would also have no need to go to Rennes-le-Chateau. Did the national art museum in Paris pay the Prieure to publish a dossier that would send the reader of the dossier away from Rennes-le-Chateau, and to re-direct that reader to the national art museum? The dossier makes references, plural, to DAGOBERT II, but not to the location where Dagobert II died, nor does there seem to be an emphasis placed on his death, or where he died, to encourage the reader to find out where he died. The dossier instead seems to put the emphasis on a different person, SIGEBERT V, a grand-son of Dagobert II, as the dossier actually bothers to record the location of the death of SIGEBERT V, at RHEDAE, that is, at Rennes-le-Chateau! As the dossier already provides the reader with the decoded Secret Message that is in the parchment from Rennes-le-Chateau, and the content of the Secret Message sends the reader from the national library in Paris, to the art museum in Paris, there is now no need for the reader to leave Paris and to travel to Rennes-le-Chateau. And with no mention of Stenay in the dossier, the reader will not be travelling to Stenay. CONCLUSION The Prieure released a dossier, and a book, both of which re-direct the reader away from Rennes-le-Chateau. Let's see... 1.The Prieure places a dossier in the national library in Paris. The dossier makes public a Secret Message from the Large Parchment discovered at Rennes-le-Chateau. The content of the Large Parchment Secret Message directs the reader AWAY FROM Rennes-le-Chateau, to the national art museum in Paris. 2. The Prieure has a book published. The Large Parchment, but not the Large Parchment Secret Message, is published in the book. Instead, a Secret Message from a Small Parchment, not published in the dossier, is published in the book. The content of the Small Parchment Secret Message directs the reader AWAY FROM Rennes-le-Chateau, to Stenay, a town on the opposite side of the country. If the Prieure planned to publish a sequel to the first book, then it seems likely, to me, that the second book would have focused on Stenay. The first book about Rennes-le-Chateau, titled 'L'Or de Rennes', had a photograph of the devil font that is in the church on the cover of the front of the book. A second book about Stenay could also have had a photograph of a devil on the cover, as the town of Stenay has on display, on more than one building, the heraldic shield of the town, which includes, above the shield, the depiction of a face of a smiling horned devil. Books by a suspect priory, with references to a devil? Hmmm... As BOWNARROW seems set on resuming the Prieure plan to send people away from Rennes-le-Chateau to search for a Woivre in and around Stenay, then I have to ask BOWNARROW, how much is the town of Stenay paying you?
|
|
|
Bows
Mar 4, 2024 14:36:26 GMT -5
Post by rubyfelixir on Mar 4, 2024 14:36:26 GMT -5
There are a lot of things that readers are told about the mystery of Rennes-le-Chateau that readers accept as matter-of-fact, and don't think about in a critical manner, when, in fact, those things are things that run counter to every-day experience. For example, the Prieure had in its possession, somehow, the Large Parchment Secret Message, a message about two painters, which the Prieure, somehow, decrypted. The Prieure then took this unique and, I would think, hard-won prize, and made the decrypted secret message available to the public! First, by putting the message in a dossier and putting the dossier in the national library, and then, second, by allowing the message to be publicized in a television documentary that was broad-cast to the public in England. Both of these actions seem like very odd actions to take if the Prieure thought that the Large Parchment Secret Message led to the location of a treasure.
|
|
|
Bows
Mar 4, 2024 23:44:57 GMT -5
Post by rubyfelixir on Mar 4, 2024 23:44:57 GMT -5
Well, BOWNARROW, it appears that the book and the puzzle of MARANATHA may have an earlier pedigree than you thought it did, pre-dating even Leo. R. Schidlof. I did a Google search using the words "maranatha et in arcadia ego book publication", for the year of the publication of the book, and the first result by Google at the top of the search results page, preceding the search results, is QUOTE Maranatha colon Et in Arcadia Ego slash Originally published 1890 END QUOTE
|
|