Arcadia Discussion Zone

The researcher Albert Fagioli has contacted Arcadia to inform us that he is looking for funding for an excavation in RLC – a project that includes Professor Robert Eisenman and Andrea Barattolo.

As background to this initiative, I have copied a piece from my work in the Mainstream book, The Dan Brown Companion about Eisenman and Barattol's previous excavation in RLC:



Further detial can be found in Albert's web pages, here:

http://albert-fagioli.blogg.org/themes- ... 53055.html

And here:

http://albert-fagioli.blogg.org/themes-rennes_le_château_la_fin_d_un_mythe_-219837.html

And here:

http://albert-fagioli.blogg.org/

Albert’s project includes (in his words):

“1°) Take away 2 paving in the Rennes-Le-Chateau church (paving 15 centimetres x 15 centimetres), and then proceed to 2 boring of 100 millimetres diameter to reach both crypts of the church. Then, put a camera down into the crypts with optic wire, to see the inside of the crypts, and indentify the tunnels starts, if they are at the place I noticed on my sketch.

2°) Do searches at the Magdala Tower, in the north-angle, to reach the Coin Stone, angled, to see if she contains a little casket.”

Interested contributors can contact Albert on his links above.

Best regards,

Andrew

I can confirm that Robert and Andrea have agreed to be interviewed by Arcadia about their past and future excavations in RLC.

Please feel free to forward any questions you would like me to ask.

Best regards,

Andrew

There is only one question: which devil is sitting on their shoulders that they want to make excavations on the estate itself??

Hell, when will some researchers finally realize that there is nothing to be found on the estate itself...the estate is only the key to find the hidden location, nothing else...

I suppose it wouldn`t be a bad idea to do a bit of Spring cleaning in the crypt,perhaps tidy up a bit and find out who`s all lying around in there.

Just watch out that you clean the proper crypt.

Having assisted Robert Eisenman's team with their GPR soundings in 2002, I would be positively dumbfounded if he or Andrea Barattolo would accept to return to RLC after having been publicly ridiculed by the August 20th 2003 fiasco.

Indeed, a portentous archeological discovery was made that day: a trunk-shaped... boulder !

One another subject, I trust you are aware that Serena Tajé never was a representative of the Vatican. She had her own PR business and all her comments were just a publicity stunt. Even Robert Eisenman recognised this, albeit belatedly.

Paul, hi. Thanks for your recent posts Very insightful….

Right, I hope you will appreciate my honestly and not resent my manipulation when I say I was aware of the Serena Tajé thing, but included it, as it added so much to the story and was, in fact, part of the lore around the whole episode. Can you tell us more about your involvement, please. Intrigued.

Best,

Andrew

Quite simply, I contacted Robert Eisenman by mail and proposed to assist him. We then met in Switzerland where he was delivering a lecture and came to an agreement. I was to organize the paperwork involved with the excavation permit application, which I did with former mayor J.-F. Lhuillier and DRAC at the end of August 2001. I also proposed to draft the core document of the application, i.e. the scientific report, but on the grounds that I was not a qualified archeologist, Eisenman turned to Andrea Barattolo, who had been recommended by Tuvia Fogel, Eisenman's litterary agent for the Italian edition of his book "James, the Brother of Jesus". By the way, Serena Tajé had also been brought in by Tuvia Fogel.

Another meeting was convened in Milano between Fogel, Barattolo and myself. Barattolo's speciality was ancient Rome and Greece, not the more relevant Middle Ages. He had never heard of RLC before and knew absolutely nothing of the historical context, which I had to explain in detail.

Then came the March 2002 GPR soundings in RLC. Were present Robert Eisenman, the GPR guys Don deChaine and Harry Jol, Andrea Barattolo, Tuvia Fogel's assistant Marinella Magri and myself. Soundings were carried out in and around the church in places designated, not by Andrea Barattolo of Robert Eisenman but... by mayor J.-F. Lhuillier. Lhuillier even had soundings carried out on his own plot of land outside RLC ! I asked Eisenman about the way research was conducted, which was off all the marks I had expected. His reply -in short- was that he had no interest whatsoever in the subject, and was merely there to humor J.-F. Lhuillier (in his own words: "I'm not rich, but I'm famous”...!). I later learned that part of the deal with mayor Lhuillier was that Discovery Channel had acquired exclusive filming rights to whatever would be discovered for the sum of 150,000 $...!

March 2002, left to right: Robert Eisenman, Marinella Magri, Andrea Barattolo. Dinner at L'Ecluse au Soleil in Sougraigne.

March 2002, left to right: Harry Jol, Don deChaine, Robert Eisenman, Marinella Magri, Andrea Barattolo. The Havana cigars were mine !

Undaunted, I then asked Don deChaine and Harry Jol to carry out soundings in the apse of the church, which they did. The results of these particular soundings were never published until I managed to obtain the radargrams from Harry Jol in april 2005. I submitted them immediately to a specialized laboratory. Their conclusion is that a 16 ft deep cavity indeed exists beneath the apse !

In the meantime, the excavation permit application had been introduced, and -quite predictably- rejected.

Nevertheless, on August 20th 2003, the Rennes municipality carried out an excavation beneath the Magdala Tower, where GPR soundings had detected an oblong-shaped object, believed by mayor Lhuillier to be a trunk "full of secrets" buried there by Saunière... What was unearthed was a simple boulder...! All this in the presence of Robert Eisenman, Michael Baigent, Andrea Barattolo who conveniently disappeared on the spot, and of course Discovery Channel who were laughing all the way back to the bank...!

...Good morning Paul, is it true that the tower we see now is built on the existing footprint of an older tower?

Good morning to you Sheila !
If not on the footprint of a tower, definitely on the footprint of ancient fortifications which were most probably built originally by the Visigoths in the 6th century. A fortified wall surrounds the village of RLC, with vestiges of portals. The original 9th century county castle stood on the spot where Saunière built the Magdala Tower, belvedere, glass house and gardens.

Tell everyone about Barattollo and the Roman tokens from Narbonne that he locked away in the town hall safe?

Are we to get similar standards of archaeology?

Ask Andrea about the Roman tokens?

Do you mean the coins that J.-L. Robin placed in one of the display cases of the museum ?

That's correct. They're from Narbonne, nothing whatsoever to do with Rennes le Chateau. What did Barattollo do with them?

Re the Roman tokens, here is an excerpt of Jean-Luc Robin's book "Rennes-le-Château: le secret de Saunière" (Editions du Sud-Ouest, 2005):

”In 1997, I made an interesting discovery: some pottery fragments, a Spanish coin and a Greek vase fragment of high archeological value.
I was surprised to learn recently that professor Barattolo had claimed the discovery and was busy working out a theory based on the items I had found.
Barattolo had in fact found these items in a display cabinet where I had placed them before leaving the domain.
However, being by nature inclined to mischief, I could not resist the temptation of planting a small time-bomb, a quite innocent device meant to frame some future impostor. And it worked beautifully !
A few days earlier, a regular customer to my restaurant threw on the table a handfull of "tokens" he had just unearthed that day: they were worn-out and quite worthless coins, although they dated from Roman times.
At the last minute, I placed these coins in the display cabinet. I was scrupulous enough not to label them as having been found in Rennes-le-Château.
These are the very coins to which distinguished professor Barattolo lends a priceless value and on the basis of which he is concocting a theory that will turn world history upside down !
Goes to show how legends are born !"

Mayor Lhuillier was so impressed by Barattolo's expert opinion that he promptly removed the coins and pottery fragments from the cabinet and locked them up in his safe.

This is odd.

My version of this passage is slightly different from this. But more or less implies the same thing. The tokens were from Narbonne and had nothing to do with Rennes le Chateau, but Baratollo picked them up and concocted a whole new theory about Rennes le Chateau.

I think I remember Jean-Luc telling me that the tokens had been found around Narbonne. But for sure, definitely not in RLC.
There is an interesting follow-up to this episode.
Barattolo wasn't aware that Lhuillier had removed the tokens and the Greek pottery.
When he came back to RLC some time later (probably August 2003), he was feeding a crowd of TV and newspaper reporters with his theory about RLC having been a "cultural acropolis" 5 centuries BC.
He then proudly suggested that they all move to the museum where he would show them the "proofs".
These had of course disappeared.
Visibly disturbed, Barattolo then changed subject and made a bizarre statement about the true motives of the "Consortium", i.e. Eisenman's team.
In his words, their trip to RLC was but part of "a larger scientific study of population migration around the Mediterranean".
I believe there is some video footage of this interview.
This puzzled me for some time, but I eventually got to understand the underpinning of such a statement, which is really too delicate to explain openly on a public discussion forum.

You have got me interested....we wont tell anyone...promise ...can you give us a hint or tell me via PM?...in which case the info would be kept private.

Seriously now, it is a delicate issue.
Ask yourself this question: what is the common link between Robert Eisenman, Andrea Barattolo, Tuvia Fogel and Serena Tajé ?
I'll consider your answers via PM.

ah, i think i'm with you...but why should that be a delicate subject?

Or am i being too naïve.

Bonjour monsieur Andrew Gough,

A la lecture des réponses de la DRAC Montpellier, mairie de Rennes-le-Château et Sous préfet de Limoux peut-on en conclure que le projet Fagioli sur le site de Rennes-le-Château manque de crédibilité?

Dans les prochains jours, les pièces manquantes seront en ma possession et je vais pouvoir déposer mon dossier officiellement.
Un projet très détaillé, comme le fut le précédent en Lorraine, (ou il est question du trésor personnel du Duc d'Enghien) et dont j'ai pu bénéficier de toutes les autorisations des propriétaires et de la Mairie du lieu des recherches. J’attends le ou les partenaires pour déposer le dossier à La DRAC de Metz. (Mr Thion étant mon interlocuteur)

En ce qui concerne les aprioris de monsieur Saussez concernant l’implication des professeurs Robert Eisenman et Andréa Barattolo dans mon dossier de fouilles pour Rennes-le-Château :

Je confirme qu’ils sont d’accord pour suivre mon dossier et l’appuyer.

Vous devriez avoir une réponse de la part du professeur Barattolo sur votre forum.

J’espère que monsieur Saussez réfléchira avant d'émettre de telles déclarations sur un forum à mon sujet : Il serait plus intelligent de sa part, avant de parler de quelqu’un qu'on ne connaît pas, de se renseigner et prendre quelques heures pour lire mon livre avant de le critiquer, comme le font les critiques littéraires…

Pour mémoire voici ce qu’il écrivait sur le blog des chercheurs à l’ancienne le 26 juin 2009.

Alaric 03 a écrit:...un article sur RLC dans la Dépêche du Midi : "Trésor de Rennes: peut être une nouvelle piste". On y apprend qu'un auteur se rendant pour la première fois à RLC, aurait découvert, via un pouvoir magnétique, des similitudes géographiques et documentaires contenues dans son livre.

"Un vent favorable a fait tomber le rapport de cet "auteur" dans ma boîte mail; c'est consternant de bêtise, en effet ! Que certains prennent ce sourcier pour un scientifique, et jusque dans les salles de rédaction de La Dépêche, c'est navrant !"
Paul SAUSSEZ

Sachez que ce sourcier à un livre en vente au Château de Chantilly, au Château de Vincennes ainsi qu’au petit Musée d’Ettenheim et son livre publié par la maison d’Edition du Crédit Mutuel de Strasbourg (Siège Social) et pas à compte d’auteur.

Qui est M. Saussez, sinon un architecte Belge pour porter de tels jugements?
Il n’est ni scientifique, ni archéologue et encore moins sourcier…

Ou en est-il de ses projets de fouilles à Rennes-le-Château…

Certes, il a fait un DVD sur la crypte de Rennes-le-Château, celle qui se trouve près de l’autel, mais il faudra qu’il revoie certaines cotations.

Je lui conseille même d'utiliser mes renseignements pour compléter celui-ci et disposer une deuxième crypte avec ses souterrains, ainsi que la troisième qui se trouve en dehors de l’église dont je n’ai pas révélé l’emplacement à ce jour.

Je ne crois pas qu’il y ait eu un plan aussi détaillé des vestiges se trouvant sous l’église de Rennes-le-Château.

D’où j’ai eu ces infos ? Demandez à monsieur Saussez, je pense qu’il pourra vous répondre !!! Peut-être ont-ils été sortis d’un chapeau ! Dans ce cas là, je ne suis pas qu’un sourcier et écrivain (par la force des choses) mais aussi un magicien…!!!

Cordialement,

Albert Fagioli

*** Pour infos le message de M. Saussez est la seul critique que j’ai eu depuis la sortie de mon livre et des révélations sur les vestiges de Rennes-le-Château.
A votre avis où ont été enterrés les seigneurs de Rennes-le-Château ?***

Dear Mr Fagioli,

I shall seize the opportunity your are affording me through your post to set the record straight, and I'll do it in English out of respect for my hosts on this forum.

I am glad for you that professors Eisenman and Barattolo have agreed to "follow and support your dossier", and I welcome any "answer" by professor Barattolo on this or any other forum.

As I said, I would be surprised to see them turn up in RLC after having experienced their own application for an excavation permit being rejected -in the curtest of terms- by their fellow archeologists at CIRA in april 2003, and again after their August 2003 fiasco, where a boulder was unearthed beneath the Magdala Tower in lieu of "Saunière's trunk full of secrets", all this under the gaze of of the History Channel and throngs of media reporters, who all went home laughing.

On a personal note, let me say I was -and still am- truly sorry that Robert Eisenman's efforts did not succeed. He had all the aces up his sleeve but failed to use them to their full potential.

Now about my comments on the "Chercheurs à l'ancienne" forum.

These comments were not about your book "Le Testament du Duc d'Enghien ou le Secret du Fabuleux Trésor de Marthille" which I have not read and which is beside the point here, but about your purported discovery of crypts and galleries beneath the RLC church.

Let us first glance at your credentials, gleaned from your blog:

You claim to be a radiesthesist, that "radiesthesy is a formidable method of clairvoyance that allows one to discover many aspects of one's future" and that "clairvoyance through radiesthesy is an art most remarkably suited for dilettantes"…

You claim to possess magnetic capabilities, magnetism being "a principle of life, an electrical principle that evaporates into symbolism and that one remembers in the palm of one's hand. It is then that the pendulum becomes the simplest physics tool in the world"…

Let us then look at your RLC curriculum, gleaned from the documents you sent me in 2008:

You claim to have located "three galleries departing from, and on the same level as, the large crypt underneath the nave, with a direct access through the cemetery adjoining the church" and "other galleries beneath the large crypt" including "a sixth gallery leading to another crypt, cave or grotto" in which said "third crypt" "there is a monetary deposit"…

You claim "these data are the fruit of researches conducted on paper and archives at more than 1,000 km of Rennes-le-Château" and that you had "no prior knowledge of the site"…

In may 2009 you conducted "a more advanced in situ research using a dowser -the equipment used by water diviners- so as to verify the authenticity of the revelations you made on the web" and that 3 eyewitnesses "followed your day-long investigations and were able to testify to the location of several starting points and crypt sites in the church, therefore comforting your sayings"…

Now hear me out:

First: your approach is purely subjective and gives no consideration whatsoever to any historical and architectural data regarding the site.

Second: along with a majority of scholars, I believe that there is no accepted scientific rationale behind the concept of dowsing and that there is no scientific evidence that it is effective.

Third: I find it amazing -if not outright deceiving- that you allow yourself to conclude that your discoveries on paper (using a pendulum, I guess) have been "verified in situ", while this "verification" was carried out by none other than yourself, using a piece of equipment -whether scientifically doubtful or not- that you alone have manipulated and interpreted. Your 3 witnesses saw nothing except you aknowledging your own theories.

Fourth: I must congratulate you on completely fooling André Galaup (one of the 3 witnesses) who promptly reported your investigations in "La Dépêche du Midi" (his former employer) with an unabashed piece of journalism-cum-publicity stunt starting with "André Galaup wants to do away with hearsay and phantasms" and ending with "André galaup has witnessed magnetic powers"…

In conclusion:

If you seriously believe you will succeed where professors Eisenman and Barattolo failed, I wish you the best of luck with your application for an excavation permit.

Provided you get the financing you are eagerly clamouring for, which I am sure will come pouring in since you claim there is "a monetary deposit" at hand, and provided of course you don't get Maggie's drawers from DRAC and the archeologists at CIRA who -without doubt- will entertain your credentials as a water diviner and radiesthesist with utmost reverence and have their socks knocked off by your scientific report based on pendulum researches and dowser investigations.

Yours sincerely,

Paul SAUSSEZ

PS. Why is your book not on sale at Librairie Empreinte in Rennes-le-Château ?

Excuse me for butting in here especially when i know nothing of the finer points that you gentlemen are discussing, but......i have to say that i don't agree with the quote below.



Mais bon enfin bref; I dowse & use the pendulum and it seems to work for me.

Sheila, having been in construction all of my life, I have seen dowsing in action many times. I myself have never accepted it as being anything more then a superstition, but in all seriousness can you tell me what makes it work. I have had many friends who have discussed this subject with me who believe it does work, I just cannot understand how.---Bill

I know nothing of the finer points here either, but on the subject of dowsing, and working in construction, I have seen it work with my own eyes, so I do feel it has some validity. I had to get some trees planted a little while back, in an area that was known to have a mass of underground services beneath it, and started off with an electronic cable avoidance tool, which was all over the place, and next to useless, when a colleague produced a pair of entwined copper wires, with rough handles fashioned at one end. Once the mirth had subsided, and we started using them, I was really quite taken aback at how effective they were. Basically, for those who haven't dowsed by this method, you walk slowly across the ground in question, with the rods held out in front of you, one in either hand, and when you pass across a below ground service, the rods move towards each other, and then cross. There are other methods as well, like the pendulum method referred to above.

In terms of how it works, I'm much less clear, but the rationale behind it I believe is that the wires detect any sort of current beneath the ground. However, what was curious on this occasion, is that not only was I able to detect live power, gas and water lines, subsequently confirmed by digging, but it also picked up a dead water pipe, with absolutely nothing running through it. That's only my own personal, anecdotal experience, but it was enough to turn me into something of a convert.

I think it has some value as a method, definitely, but a somewhat inexact science, perhaps. In terms of it authenticating or not the existence of something beneath ground, it would be a clue to help you know where to dig, but not any sort of proof in itself, aside from the impossibility of knowing the precise nature of what one's "reading" is detecting, without actually doing the digging. So from the conversation above, I can see why an archaelogical authority would be dubious about claims made from this method, even though I do feel the method has some validity.

Anyway, sorry for going off-topic, but my ears pricked up when I saw the reference to dowsing, which is an interesting subject in its own right, and given the amount of "treasure" hunting that goes on around RLC, a subject of some relevance.