Firstly we have a copy of the original page shown in yellow to distinguish it from my rebuttal remarks.
Here is the article that maintains the Priory of Sion Parchments are fake.
|I still do not have the answer to my letter of the 17
January nor the sum of money. I must use it in six days. Thus only one
word to warn you that Gérard de Sède is
in possession of the case of files of the Priory of Sion stolen to the 37,
street Saint Lazare and with its contents he means prepare a book against
us. He is in possession of the file of George Monti, as well as photocopy
of your contract with Rene Descadeillas or you 65% of the rights for the
work: Rennes and its last Lords. Worse still, in this case was your
(original) manuscript of Circuit! What can one make of it? To acknowledge
before the publication which the work CIRCUIT isn't me. Want you me to
give an answer?
On the origin of the Priory of Sion, my research recoups a hold on them, all the publications of Philippe Toscan come from one [who] is delirious under the effect of drug, the truth according to the files of the Order held by my uncle Saint Hillier with the Chateau de Lys, it is on September 19, 1736, which François d' Hautpoul and Jean Paul de Negre founder of the Priory of Sion, the 2nd Grand Maitre is well Andre Hercules de Rosset (Limoux/Stenay). The continuation does not have any error: Charles and Maximilien of Lorraine, finally after the revolution; Nodier, Hugo, Debussy (with Monti) and Cocteau. I received threatening letter of insane, his name Roger Dagobert, he declares [to be] the descendant of general Dagobert, and Dagobert Saint, therefore heir legitimate to the gold mines that are in your grounds of ROCK NEGRE has Rennes, moreover pretender to the throne of France. Soon
Philippe de Chèrisey
He says he is the author of the SOLUTION not the encryption.
"…my grid decipherment has only 25 letters whereas the French alphabet has 26 – I have left out W. Was I cheating? No, not at all, as I drew up Documents I and II in semi-uncial handwriting to give the impression that they dated from an historical period when the letter W was unknown to the Western world as U and V were used instead."
Why would he do this? Don't forget he then goes on to explain that the BERGER PAS DE TENTATION text refers to Delacroix's painting in St Sulpice not Poussin or Teniers, a time when the French used a 26 letter alphabet. Why is he complicating things by using a 25 letter alphabet? But probably more to the point, if he was in collusion with Gerard de Sède why did allow de Sède to make a glaring error in his book by letting him decode a code made using a 25 letter alphabet by using a 26 letter alphabet? A decryption that produced errors. If he leaves out Poussin but then goes to Delacroix, where does ET IN ARCADIA EGO fit into his scheme? Don't forget he presumably manufactured this also complete with the phrase needed to make the final text i.e. PS PRAECUM:
This confession is decidedly fishy and has come out the blue in 2006. Or to put it another way since the blockbuster book The Da Vinci Code sold millions. That in itself should explain a few things. The words 'Wagon' and 'Band' seem appropriate and don't forget the source of this has tried to peddle fake documents before.
P.S. Do you know that the famous manuscripts supposedly discovered by the Abbé Saunière were composed in 1965? And that I took responsibility for being the author?
Philippe de Chérisey.
Here is the confirmation that he and de Sède were enemies and that he wished to discredit him. However again de Chèrisey shoots himself in the foot here. First he says he composed them in 1965 then he says he composed them in 1961. You have to remember too that all of this hoax needs to go hand in hand with the Dossiers Secrets and these included the Lobineau document and the name Jean Cocteau who was still alive at this time when de Chèrisey was apparantly making his hoax . Did Cocteau agree to be included in de Chèrisey's little game?
|During the 1970s Pierre Plantard and Philippe de Chérisey made the acquaintance of Jean-Luc Chaumeil, and they both entrusted him with the original "parchments" that were used in Gérard de Sède’s 1967 book L’Or de Rennes – together with the handwritten document by Philippe de Chérisey Pierre et Papier that contained the encoding and decoding technique to the large "parchment" – as well as the confession that de Chérsiey was the creator of both "parchments". This material was given to Jean-Luc Chaumeil because of a book that he was preparing at that time – Le Trésor du Triangle d’Or, published in 1979 – Plantard and de Chérisey were hoping that Jean-Luc Chaumeil would use their material in his book as part of their revenge campaign against Gérard de Sède. Jean-Luc Chaumeil, as it happened, failed to publish any of this material in his book – but he did produce transcripts of several interviews with Philippe de Chérisey where he admitted again that he was the creator of the "parchments".|
What Smith fails to mention here is that Jean Luc Chaumeil and Gerard de Sède had together attempted to scam Henry Lincoln and the BBC with a fake document and that far from being in collusion with Plantard and de Chèrisey, Chaumeil was in collusion with de Sède. The question remains why would Philippe de Chèrisey give his documents to a man who was a friend of a man who was in possession of their stolen property?
This is fantasy aimed at people with little knowledge.
And later, in L’Enigme de Rennes (1978), Philippe de Chérisey wrote:
Philippe de Chèrisey had visited Rennes les Bains in the 1960s because of an illness he had. He hints that his initial discovery was indeed Rennes les Bains. He later said something interesting after his visit he said:
"The doctors prescribed me a cure in Rennes les Bains, obsolete thermal spa located on the meridian line zero. I was going to discover over there that if I had a duty, it was to avoid the attention of others whilst moving evasively and secretly"
"Two contrary desires share my heart, glory to publish all that the great day and to jealously keep the treasure without saying anything. My whole life needs to hesitate and I awake in the same moment that I die.........By the celibacy which is imposed on them the priests are the best guards of treasures than one can conceive ........A priest, because he is concerned with Sky and Earth, must meditate on the relationship of astronomy with the geography....With the difference in the phenomena which should still be seen to believe, Cromleck of RLB [Rennes les Bains] is seen only when one believes in it, nothing is really proven there, not even the Roulers or hones it posed which will appear readily to the whims of nature"
"What happened next far exceeded my wildest dreams! Today visitors to RENNES-LE-CHATEAU are encouraged to admire, at the home of Monsieur BUTHION, the restaurateur who keeps the Hôtel de la Tour, two superb enlargements of photocopies of MY ENCIPHERED TEXTS!"
Easily misconstrued this. It was indeed de Chèrisey who bought to us these documents and so they could indeed be termed as his. This however does not mean he constructed them, only that he found them.
Well a photocopy cannot be made to prove anything. The fact it's a photocopy makes the whole exercise null and void. What Jean Luc Chaumeil neither proves nor disproves anything and is therefore totally useless. However looking at the history of de Chèrisey's dealings with Henry Lincoln it does appear that de Chèrisey only ever had photocopies himself. One does wonder why de Chèrisey seemed to confess so many times but never actually produced anything to prove what he said was fact.
We can clearly see from this that the two parchments are yellowed differently, the top shepherdess parchment is clearly older than the bottom Dagobert parchment. Also we need to ask why two parchments? Why make the hoax so complicated that two parchments are required?
This slight of hand is typical, this in no way proves that documents of an older vintage were not in existence. It only suggests that they were bought into the public domain on these dates and that nobody had found a prior copy or bothered to publish it before Vigouroux.
A wholly incorrect statement.
They aren't going to discover it he's right on that score, however the fact remains that we do have the key and the method what more do we need? The person who has something to gain is the very person who holds the key and the method as indeed we do. But at the end of the day the final message is still not clear so there was no point in encoding it in the first place. Unless of course you wanted it made public in the first place and it has certainly succeeded on that score.
Remember the letters were found on a tombstone that was documented in 1906. The creator then added the letters PS PRAECUM - What for? Why not make up a text with the correct number of letters in the first place? Remember you are trying to make up something that's nonsense so all you need to do is make up something with an esoteric feel with the correct number of letters i.e. 119. The only reason you need 128 is in order to make 2 x 64 =128 and you only need this in order to use the Knights tour. So why include PS PRAECUM? Why not simply use all the tomb letters and ditch the BLUE APPLES on the end? Or , if you're not going to use him anyway, why not simply ditch the word Teniers and make a new date instead of PAX DCLXXXI to make up the difference?
Why make it more complicated than it need be?
The problem is that the BLUE APPLES are indeed a phenomena in the church at Rennes le Chateau. They do indeed hit the altar at midday on 17th January, but why should this be secret? On the contrary it would make an interesting attraction into the church for Sauniere and in no way compromises the religious dignity of the church. What we will also find is that the Teniers painting carries some meaning as does the Poussin painting. In fact what we find is that the entire phrase
BERGERE PAS DE TENTATION QUE POUSSIN TENIERS GARDENT LA CLEF PAX DCLXXXI PAR LA CROIX ET CE CHEVAL DE DIEU J'ACHEVE CE DAEMON DE GARDIEN A MIDI POMMES BLEUES
yields a result.
However here's what Gino Sandri said about the coded parchments:
GS: Forgive me to repeat myself, the drafting of these parchments answered at the time a precise goal. There still, it was a question of diverting the attention in order to protect from other documents. As you know it, since 1956, a series of publications diffused under various pseudonyms is put in circulation. We are in the presence of a true campaign which aims at a character or a company which acts in the field of the occult one. This exchange does not concern that a restricted circle. Forty years after, these documents became without interest if it is only historical. It is at the very least amusing to raise that a "dispensary" installed at the time with Rennes-le-Chateau produces quantity of documents of identical invoice as well as the papers or correspondence allotted to the Abbé Boudet or to the Abbé Bigou. These writings are then the juicy trade object which, it appears, continued. Unfortunately, the authors implied in the history of Rennes are victims of this swindle in which the Priory of Sion does not have any share and no benefit draws any.