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 pronoucement 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 admissable 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 liklihood of it being so.
But, what
happens? She dies without telling anything! Suppposedly. 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-Chateau" 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 Msr. 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 quesioned 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-Chateau.
But, this
is enough for now.
Laura
