Arcadia Discussion Zone

Has a cryptic ending
Fire purifies

For those who may be interested Inside the Priory of Sion is reviewed in this month's Fortean Times (issue 284):

"The people who like this sort of thing will love it" - I guess that would apply to most books in this genre.

I'd give it a little more than 5/10, but then if I was a teacher, I'd probably be one of those generous marker types. It's a real curate's egg of a book, but the good parts are good, and one can't help but be - or at least, I couldn't help but be - won over by the author's earnest and unbridled enthusiasm for his subject, and his genuine affinity for the landscape around Rennes.

I'll read the review when it eventually gets onto the FT website, but I'd be interested to know who they got to write it. And indeed your overall thoughts on the book, errors and anomalies identified by you further up the thread notwithstanding.

Hi Richard,

Spartacus wrote:



Richard wrote:



Well, I'd give it a 3.5/10, but then if I was a teacher, I'd definitely be one of those miserable marker types, demanding accuracy at all costs

Richard wrote:



Personally, I couldn't help but be disappointed by the numerous inaccuracies, misrepresentations, and lack of anything even close to 'revelatory'. I was also disappointed by the lack of anything even remotely close to a critical examination of the very implausible claims made on behalf of the Priory of Sion. However, it does collect up, bring together, and discuss (with a narrative bias unfortunately) a large number of Sion themes. For that reason alone, it is worth a read, well worth owning by people like us, and worth the asking price IMHO.

Richard wrote:



Our good friend Mr. Barrett

Richard wrote:



Well as I've already stated in an earlier post IMHO Mr. Howells wishes to position himself as the 'spokesman' of the 'spokesman' of the modern fantasy version of the Priory of Sion narrative. It's a reasonable move, given that less than a decade ago, that fantasy narrative was worth hundreds of millions of dollars. With that in mind, IMHO 'errors' in the book may be deliberate misrepresentations designed to uphold the fantasy narrative that is most desirable to Howells and Haywood, if not Gino Sandri. I think Roger/Tertius and Tim discussed who was leading who in this comic caper. IMHO that is an interesting question worthy of further discussion.

I'd be extremely interested to read your opinion of the book etc Richard, if you get the time, of course...

Regards,

Spartacus

Ah - makes sense. I do miss DVB on this forum.



Yes, you're right, it isn't a critical examination at all, and as such the subtitle "Inside the Priory of Sion" is highly misleading. This book may be many things, some of them good, but a work of investigative journalism it most certainly is not.

But I think, as I said before, one has to, in a sense, set aside this major deficiency, and the narrative bias you refer to, and accept the book for what it is, rather than what it might have been and isn't, in order to get as much as possible of value out of it. And again, to derive as much as possible from it, one has to, up to a point at least, set aside reservations one might have about Haywood, and concentrate more on what the man appears to think, rather than what he is pupporting to be. What I mean by that is that if one judges Haywood solely on the criteria of whether he is or is not a bona fide member of the PdS of 2012 (assuming there is such a thing, and for whatever that might be worth even if there was) then one will likely come to a very negative assessment. But if one instead chooses to see him as a high ranking freemason, steeped in hermeticism and the occult, fascinated by alchemy, esoterically minded, and with a long-standing interest in the Rennes affair, then it's not completely unreasonable to suppose that he might have the odd nugget of interest to offer. So I decided to go with the uncritical approach to the book, if you like, and see what I could get out of it.

So, for example, when I read the section on Le Serpent Rouge, which is perhaps the best part of the book, I really felt I understood that poem just a little bit better than I had previously. Now, bear in mind, I'm far less steeped in RLC lore than most here, and understand many of the historic, religious and esoteric themes much less, and I only have conversational French, not even that really, just enough to get by when I go down there without needing to speak English, so I start from a very low base, and I've always struggled with LSR. Still do. But I genuinely feel a little more confident with it after reading that book. The point of me recounting that is to note that if Howells is channelling Haywood, at least partly, in his interpretation of the poem, and if I feel I've got some benefit from that, then I kind of have to concede that Haywood's perspective is of some, albeit possibly small, value. At least to me.



I don't know if I could add much more to what I said on Page 7 (2/11/11, 1412 hrs) and Page 8 (same date, 2347 hrs) of this thread, some of which I've probably repeated above. I am, however, going to read the book again this month, and hope to add some further thoughts.

On your point above about Howells setting himself up as a spokesperson for the "PdS", it's a perfectly valid line of argument, but I'd have to disagree with you. My impression is that Howells is a person who is absolutely consumed by his fascination for the Rennes affair, and desperate to find answers about it, and hence he's turned to someone he genuinely seems to believe in, in the hope that he might provide the answers that he's looking for. One might well question his choice, but I wouldn't personally question his motives. I honestly didn't feel I was being sold a line, as it were, by Howells, on reading his book; I think it's a completely honest book in that sense. I'm not quite so sure, however, that Howells himself isn't being sold a line by his star witness.

As I said on a previous post, I don't know Rob Howells, have never met him, never communicated with him (I did try to send him a little thank-you note through his website when I finished his book, but apparently you have to be on "Facebook" to do that, which I'm not, and never will be), but the impression I have gained of him is overwhelmingly positive - based upon his writing, interviews he's given, and most particularly what people who do know him, and whose judgement I completely trust, have told me about him privately. So I think he's a thoroughly good guy, a person of integrity, and he has an enthusiasm for his subject, and a lack of cynicism about it that I personally find very refreshing. But as I've said before, his book, worthwhile and enjoyable though it is, has been irretrievably compromised by its highly disproportionate reliance upon one rather questionable source. Why he should have so much faith in this source one can only wonder about. I would guess in part, it's because he may feel that by questioning Haywood too critically in his narrative, he might risk terminating a source of information he clearly feels is valuable to him. And also, I would think, based upon my impression of Howells, he might just be a bit too nice to take such an approach, and having befriended Haywood, feels a certain loyalty to him, and an unwillingness to properly interrogate much of what he tells him. If so, that speaks well of him as a person, if not as a researcher.

There are a few other things I'd like to talk about, concerning Haywood's apocalypse beliefs, his list of PdS Grandmasters, his motivation for adopting the Jesus bloodline argument, and various other things, but I've already gone on for way too long, so another time perhaps.

An excellent summation, Richard - kudos to you.



I do too, I wish he'd come back. He and I have had our "moments" in the past but he's a good guy, and very well versed in many subjects that interest me.



That would probably be counterproductive to their raison d'être, don't you think? Not having read the book myself, obviously, I can't say for certain; but keeping the hamster wheel a-spinnin' would be their likely goal, yes?



I see your point, Richard, but must ask anyway - if one looks solely at what motivates Haywood, what has it to do with Plantard, Chérisey, et al, and the Rennes affaire? Isn't he then simply another chercheur curieux? It seems like one would have to give him the benefit of the doubt rather than simply set aside one's reservations about his résumé. I mean, I'm more than willing to concede him the honor of representing the PoS of 2012, although I don't believe for a moment that the PoS of 2012 is a continuation of the PoS of 1956-1999. Like the myriad Templar groups existing today, anyone can take on that mantle and persuade someone that they're "authentic" as "authenticity" is relative in the eyes of many.



And yet Howells has been at this since the late '90s (that I'm aware of, if not longer than that) and has had personal access and relationships with authors and other cognoscenti for years through his job at Watkins Books before any of us had ever heard of Haywood. And I think he's been the acting "spokesman" for longer than Haywood has been around. I've never met the chap but I know several people who know him, all seem to feel he's a likeable fellow and very much "consumed" by the Rennes affaire, although some (and I'd rather not name names) have related to me their somewhat different take on his curiosity due to the fact that he clings so tenaciously to details long discarded or disproven by others. This doesn't resemble genuine curiosity so much as determination to maintain appearances. The impression I get (and yes, I admit, this is from second-hand sources) is that Howells is far more dedicated to preserving the myth than to getting beyond it to find out what's at the core. This is why I have difficulty believing that Howells is the disciple and Haywood is the master. Their combined narrative hasn't changed (at least in a summary way) since the days when Howells was flying solo, which is why I get the impression that it is a partnership of equals, a joining of forces, with nothing hierarchical about their relationship. Each simply endorses the other.



Well, you're a lot more generous that I am, I suppose.

TCP

Richard


I just know of Haywood's apocalypse belief of a "deluge" which he talked about in Bloodline
in the book of Howells is there more expansion on this

Richard I'm open to talk about it
especially since we approach the 2012 Maya Calendar ending

One thing I took from Howell in his reading is his belief that the church may have been behind some of this
and I concur with that....because it could be that the church knew that this time would come
I call it the "Underground Church"

Well, I certainly think there's some wishful thinking involved on the part of Rob Howells, at the very least; in the sense of wanting to believe in Haywood, and as a consequence being loath to ask some of the questions he should be asking. That could well be a factor too. And also perhaps of having travelled so far down a path that it's now going to be a little difficult to turn around again.



Very little, it would seem, which is another odd thing about him. He speaks very little, in interviews I've heard him give, about the Priory story that we've come to know, or about Plantard or de Cherisey (although I did once hear him refer to Plantard as "Pierre", thus implying familiarity with him), and little specifically about Rennes. When he talks, he tends to riff mainly on biblical themes, sacred feminine, his apocalypse, etc.



To make as generous an interpretation as possible, he may feel that he, and others who move in the same esoteric circles are, let's say, continuing a tradition, and perhaps that Sion is more of an idea than an entity, and he's a spokesman for that idea ... one can imagine, actually, how one might justify that in one's own mind, and come to genuinely believe it.

Anyway - breaking news - in the last radio interview I heard him give (he's appeared quite a lot on Rene Barnet's radio programme, where he seems to be aquiring "Friend of the Show" status) he claimed to have had a bit of a falling out with his PdS colleagues, and may now be shunned as a result. Make of that what you will ...



Yes, quite; you and I could set one up this evening couldn't we, if we had nothing better to do.

I agree, and one can usually tell a "true believer" when they stay insistently on their path after having been shown it to be a dead end.



Which, to me, suggests that perhaps Haywood's initial influences go back no further than The Da Vinci Code. Brown was equally disinterested in the RLC aspects.



Yes, "continuing a tradition" - that sounds more "Templar" than anything. "Sion" as a state of mind rather than an actual organization. At least Plantard dealt in tangibles.



Wouldn't that be rather dangerous if Haywood knew all the secrets of the universe? He might go rogue! And isn't the PoS story as we've all come to know it over the years replete with mysterious "accidental" demises? I take it he's still at liberty if he's giving radio interviews.



Today it's as easy as buying an internet domain name. Of course one would have to be Johnny-on-the-spot to get the good ones.

TCP

I'll try, lovuian, but you're going to be way ahead of me on this sort of subject.

In answer to your question, yes, there is quite a bit more in the book about this, though from memory - and when I read it again, I might be able to add more - I think it's more a case of Rob Howells speculating as to what Haywood might be getting at, rather than Haywood expounding on it himself. He does talk about it more in his radio interviews, to which I've added a link below (scroll through the schedule index and you'll find the various shows he's appeared on), but more about the idea of a new messiah emerging after the apocalypse, and he tends to be quite evasive when asked anything specific about either the event itself, or what might follow it. He claims to know the date when it will happen - "in our lifetime" - but will not disclose it, because of the mass panic it would presumably engender, and claims that there are a small number of locations in the world, all mountain ranges, where one might find a place of safety.

http://www.latalkradio.com/Rene.php

Completely and utterly barmy, imho, but that is what the man appears to believe.

Why should this be, I wonder? Because, looking at this from the perspective of someone claiming to be a spokesman for the PdS, I can't think of any precedent at all in any PdS documents, or statements or interviews from the Plantard era that would suggest such a thing; it doesn't appear to form any part of their thinking at all. Except, I suppose, it has some echo in the PdS ideas about a roi perdu, lost king, which one might see as some second coming type figure, some messiah that emerges out of the global wreckage to lead the chosen few to a place of safety, etc. I believe in that happening even less than I believe in an apocalypse happening, but in terms of trying to understand Haywood, one could maybe make a case for belief in an apocalypse coming from the same tradition as belief in a roi perdu. Maybe?

As it happens, there is a whole chapter on armageddon and biblical prophecy in the HBHG sequel "Messianic Legacy", which I just flicked through for the first time in a long time, but it forms part of a long section on general religious themes, and no specific connection is made back to the PdS, although the authors do speculate about a roi perdu character in their conclusion to the book. I do also recall some talk of Plantard's, maybe in that book, about the apparent significance of the end of the age of Pisces and the start of that of Aquarius. I think, in literal terms, the word apocalypse comes from epoch, or era, does it not? So maybe some connection there, possibly.

In terms of precedents for apocalypse theory within the Rennes story more generally, then there is of course the book by the late Elizabeth van Buren, "Refuge of the Apocalypse", which I dare say Haywood has read, and there is also, in that book and elsewhere, the idea of a portal, some doorway to another dimension, in the landscape around Rennes, an idea I find more interesting and persuasive than that of apocalypses and second comings, but the two things could quite easily be woven together, if one was of a mind to. So that may form part of his thinking as well.

Or it could just be cynical exploitation of all the 2012 hysteria, that will probably get worse and worse as this year goes on. But he seems to genuinely believe it, as do a lot of religious fundamentalist types as well of course, but to be fair, he doesn't really strike me as that sort of person, so who knows where his idea about this comes from. All very odd.

Just started reading this book. In the introduction Mr Howells states that Plantard claimed in HBHG that the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene was the key of the RLC mystery. I don't think Plantard said anything of the sort ?

True, in an interview some time after HBHG was published, Plantard vehemently denied that the "marriage" had anything to do with the mystery, adding that he didn't believe in it himself.

TCP

Talk about sloppyness, sloppy moi. Just went through the threid and a lot of the book's errors have been highlighted by Spartacus. Whatever, I will still plough through the book, which, if it counts for anything, is more reader-friendly than M. Chaumiel's last tome (yeah, I know it was a translation.) .

I'm curious about Haywood's apocalypse scenario. Whenever anyone mentions the 2012 carry-on, I immediately have memories of Bugarach village, and the restaurant we couldn't get a table at. Sorry that's how my mind works. Richard mentions Elizabeth van Buren and her book. I regret now I never bought it back in 2002 in the Atelier bookshop but the subject matter seemed, as 'Mrs P' would put it, "on the potty level". But in hindsite she seems a rather interesting individual, you could say that wandering through that field of hers south of the village changed my opinion of her somewhat.

Me too.

There's a restaurant in Bugarach?

http://www.linternaute.com/restaurant/r ... anou.shtml

Our landlady in Couiza suggested reserving a table by phone. We didn't, we just turned up and it was fully booked ! A nice place to see in the apocalypse !

Thanks, I didn't realise that was there - despite it being a miniscule place! - yes, it does look nice. Bet they're all booked up for 21/12/12!

Thanks Richard
your an incredible source and thanks for the links


Richard


I'm not surprised at this breaking news Richard

If you remember Plantard resigned as Grandmaster and he made reference that the American side of the PDS
did not like what he was doing

this is just speculation but perhaps the American side is not happy with Haywood
either

The "Underground Church" has documentation...the history goes back to the Revolution and the church had to go underground to survive...they were guillotining the clergy



She was the last to be killed at the guillotine
Sr MAGDALEN FONTAINE

The women are the back bone of the underground church
Howell's and Haywood inference about women's position in the church
is I believe part of this underground current

America is where they went to escape ...there is documentation and I know a member of it

I can also say that a Apocalyptic ...or Revelations type of myth is part of their story

And that is understandable when your clergy are being tortured and killed like the martyrs in Roman times
Rome eventually collapsed

I don't know if Magdalene and Jesus were married but I believe she was a Disciple and a Apostle of the Apostles
in other words a woman has a right to be seated next to Jesus as some believe is shown in Da Vinci's Last Supper

whether she is factual or not ...she deserves a seat there

that is why you see the Da Vinci Last Supper carved into the altars

It also could be a reference to the celibacy law...that perhaps they saw the church's downfall because of it


New Orleans


but Vatican II hid them by placing another altar so the Priest could face the congregation

coincidence?
The Nuns in America owned land and hospitals and orphanages
They were the major teachers of young women in America

This is one of my favorite pictures it was taken at Arcadia MO


What do I see? Mother Mary being taught to read by her Mother and Father
It seems so simple doesn't it but so profound
Howell and Haywood point out
what I see too
Women's role in the church
and that had to do with
Women's EDUCATION....changed the world....

As far as the Apocalyptic part
that the Vatican would fall ....comes from Saint Malachy ..or some say Nostradamus
but getting back to Leonardo Da Vinci

he had a vision of a Deluge in his writings
http://www.history.com/shows/nostradamus-effect/videos/leonardos-deluge#leonardos-deluge

Sea Water will Rise
Above the High Peaks of Mountains
towards the sky
and then fall down again
Onto the dwellings of man
Da Vinci

It maybe this prophecy or vision that Haywood is looking at
and that maybe indicative to a Tsunamis caused by a major disaster such as a pole shift
predicted by Edgar Cayce

In the Acadian churches they refer to the Second Coming

as for as Elizabeth Van Buren ....she probably believed the Alps and Mountain Peaks would be a haven during
disaster such as a deluge

It is funny this picture is on the movie 2012


Just remember you were warned

like you said it plays into the 2012 mystique rather well

I don't know the answers but I have lots of questions ...thanks Richard for your insight
as for Haywood he is a great Alchemist....He is very interesting to listen too

It's easy to find: you drive eastward along the main drag through the village and the road down the the restaurant is signposted on the right hand side. You can see it on google earth.

Elizabeth Van Buren
http://youtu.be/q4FtBn7Bq4g
She talks about how Rennes Chateau is a sacred place and that the mountain peaks
such as Himalayas Andes are energy points

She considered Rennes Chateau to be the center of the Energy grid


Elizabeth seems quite nice
Another reference to the Apocalypse

Another of her books

from Ben Hammott;s site



It seems Elizabeth loved the stained glass windows too

Lazarus rising from the dead



She also had the Le Phoenix
which would go with the Rebirth

Re Mr Howells book; I wonder if anyone picked up on this line on page 11 ? Significant perhaps as it seems to emphasize the distinction between the Haywood Pos and whatever PoS existed before.
"The esoteric branch of the Priory of Sion appears to be the current name for a group of adepts of the Western esoteric tradition".
I've emphasized the word 'current'.

One wonders if he's suggesting that the old PoS wasn't "esoteric" in and of itself. Given all the written material they left behind I'd find that a bit hard to swallow.

TCP

I think it's a group of adepts (or whatever) who are using (or perhaps adopting) the PoS brand in their current manifestation, and perhaps in years to come they'll label themselves something else. From what I've read so far they seem to have humanity's spiritual welfare as their concern and if so good on 'em.

I'd suggest that it goes back to the point I tried to make earlier on this thread. As I pointed out, Pierre Plantard denied the legitimacy of the so-called 'bloodline' claim. Hayward and Howells are both 'supporters' of the 'bloodline' claim. Therefore, they must, for want of a better word, 'jettison' Plantard! I suggest that all the 'errors', misrepresentations, and other peculiar passages will, in one way or another, relate to their attempts to support and bolster the publishing world fantasy version of the Priory of Sion, as opposed to the Plantard fantasy version.

Regards,

Spartacus

It almost seems as though Plantard was jettisoned - when was it, '84 or '85? - because he'd spoiled someone's fun by giving that interview. I can think of a lot of bloodline copycats from that time period - none claiming descent from Jesus and MM though, but lots of rois perdu.

TCP