Arcadia Discussion Zone

This cache consisted of several volumes of bound "registers" (1632, and at least 2 for 1624, perhaps several more), addenda to these volumes, and several loose pages and folios. Also... a "great parchment" purported to be the "Great Will of the Perillos Family".

It turns out that neither volume is a "formal" register, and neither covers the Perillos area. No problem, AD claims that this is covered in the material that no one has yet seen, ie the "extra" 1624 volume and/or the loose pages (which make such claims very problematic because authentication will need to be that much more stringent). He also claims the "great testament of the Perillos" list all their properties and rights.

A page on the English language SP site relates the events and compares the "mysterious set-aside" of land in Perillos to the "equally-mysterious" set-aside of the Quai Pierre Scize, in Lyon, which latter was handily debunked on this forum.

AD claims to ALSO have received a CD in the mail, with the materials previously published by Pascal This content has been removed by the Moderator, who judged it to have broken the House Rules and is offering them for sale "at cost" to SP members, and to the public "as supplies last". No one has asked him why they'd have to order CDs when they can simply download it, and why they'd do so in any case, since these materials are admittedly "worthless", as far as the "Perillos Enigma" is concerned.

Which brings up an interesting question... IF these "held back" materials are indeed probative of Douzet's claims, then why not release them to great fanfare? What time or other element is considered a sufficient factor to have to "wait for", prior to the release of such vindicating documents? This is baffling to me... I hope you all have some sensible theories that can explain this away for me.

This is from the English SP website. Note that it claims that the "set-aside" is "administratively" untouchable, and that "Even the lords of Perillos are subject to this LAW."

Which begs several pointed questions... what manner of Law is this? What "administration" had the authority to impose such a Law, at that time, on Perillos lands? (Other than the Perillos, themselves, as part of a testamentary bequest, perhaps?)

Then there is the claim that the "French authorities decided to uphold this Law"... Really? How so? Or could it be perhaps that they were bound by a legal bequest to French subjects?

Well... developments are taking place, fast and furious...
Interspersed between the usual jeremiads and insults, it appears that now there will soon be an "SP Meeting" (still not the promised public conference with "ministerial authentication") at which a cornucopia of Courtade "registers" will be presented. There is apparently an entire library of them. One can pick and choose from which the "loose pages" might have taken flight. It could become a lottery! Guess which book the "page" came from, and win a CD!

Apart from that, not much seems to be forthcoming. I feel particularly aggrieved, because I've defended the SP, in the past (on this very forum, in fact), feeling that they've certainly unearthed any number of interesting elements (despite disagreeing with their conclusions and interpretations).

But now... I can't say I'm seeing the calm and methodical explanations one might have a right to expect, under the circumstances. I only see scarlet-faced indignation and colourful language, and constantly changing promises. But that's just me. Perhaps my expectations were too high.

I feel particularly aggrieved, because I've defended the SP, in the past (on this very forum, in fact) .........

Well.... believe it or not, the Courtade and "Great Testament of the Perillos" saga continues...

After challenging Maurice Monnot to come and see the documents for himself, in private with no witnesses, at the risk "of being called a liar and accomplice of mine"... AD changed his mind and suggested the meeting to look at the documents take place in the presence of an "huissier" (a sort of French Bailiff) at Mr. Monnot's cost, of course.

Others (including Pascal) immediately offered to pitch in on the Bailiff costs, and 3 were suggested in the area.

There was a sudden silence from AD (who was supposed to agree to a date, so that the arrangements could be made), and the latest news from AD's "familiar", as posted on the French SP forum, now specifies that A] AD is waiting for the identity of the Bailiff (who will be chosen based on availability once the date is fixed) prior to fixing a date, and B] AD requires that proper penance be offered first, with participants making the pilgrimage on their knees, self-flagellating, wearing sack-cloth and ashes, hood optional.

So... what next?

I suspect that this isn't of much interest to anyone anymore, but the latest documented "revelation" on the Courtade saga is here:

http://societe-perilleuse.forums-actifs ... de-t54.htm