Discussion:
The History of Certain Rosicrucian Orders
(too old to reply)
c***@yahoo.com
2005-11-11 00:57:52 UTC
Permalink
A Very interesting discussion has arisin starter by a certain Soror LVX
93 regarding the questionable origins of the French Rosicrucian Order
the FAR+C and its Rosicrucian affiliation (or lack thereof). Below you
will find a recapitulation of the discussion thus far.

Soror LVX, your thesis is very interisting thus far. Before I add
anything further to the discussion, however, I would like to here your
opinion on one thing. Do you believe that the Sociatas Rosicruciana in
Anglia has a legitimate Rosicrucian lineal affiliation, and if so, from
whence does it arise?

- Le Chevalier De La Rose

***@yahoo.co.uk
Nov 8, 2:26 pm show options
Thus Mr. Griffin and Mr. Hevia, in their attempt to appear as the
"real" or "authentic" Golden Dawn cannot attent such a meeting for it
would mean to give credit to Groups other than their own and people
other then themselves. This is behaviour thathas been called
"highlander" mentality by others and been rebutted by above mentioned
Griffin/Hevia troll GDtruthseeker or Nomen Nescio, Sar Draconis etc.


Draconis is not merely a 'troll' identity. He is an SRICF and former
BOTA member who supports Griffin. He is probably the source of the
information behind Griffin's now-suppressed attack on other R+C groups
- the 'Will the real GD stand up' essay where Griffin made a number of
embarrassing and obvious historical errors.
Draconis is more subtle in his support, his technique being to let out
carefully selected information to hint that there is some basis to
Griffn's arguments. For example a reference is made to a suppressed
chapter of SRIA history, which,according to Griffin,shows that the SRIA

tried to misappropriate the GD lineage of Kenneth Mackenzie.

This is patently untrue. The suppressed chapter was to do with early
infighting in the SRIA of the 1870s. But most people don't know that
and posters like Draconis are able to trade on that ignorance.

Another little white lie is to do with the Freres Aines group whose
rituals Griffin was at one time claiming to have as his second order
material. Draconis intimated that the Freres Aines [Elder Brothers of
the R+C] group was of great antiquity as an Italian cult researcher had

once commented in a book that it had an old documentation which
stretched back centuries.

The Freres Aines did have some old documents, however they were merely
tax and real estate records mixed up with carefully forged esoteric
documents. The idea was to indicate that what was being referred to as

land transfers were in fact the handing down of a lineage from the
Templars.

In fact the Freres-Aines hail back to the dim and dark days of 1973 and

their creation involved a key member of the discredited Prieure de Sion

prank.

At that time, the land and tax documents were presented to a number of
occultists in Belgium along with the carefully inserted forged
'esoteric' documents. They are a classic case of the old examiner's
comment. 'Sir, your essay is both good and original. But the part
that is original is not good, and the part that is good is not
original.'

The Freres-Aines rituals are not particularly special - they have been
circulating privately in French and Spanish for years and are no more a

genuine second order connection than any other email you might receive
with a scanned document attached. I have them myself. Further, they
are of no great age.

On such wondrous foundations are modern Golden Dawns built. An
'esoteric current' which harnesses 'occult energies' contained within
old tax documents. Magnificent.

Shades of Umberto Eco's 'Templar' laundry list.

Reply



3. Sar Draconis
Nov 8, 6:57 pm show options

Dear soror_lux73
Thus Mr. Griffin and Mr. Hevia, in their attempt to appear as the
"real" or "authentic" Golden Dawn cannot attent such a meeting for it
would mean to give credit to Groups other than their own and people
other then themselves. This is behaviour thathas been called
"highlander" mentality by others and been rebutted by above mentioned
Griffin/Hevia troll GDtruthseeker or Nomen Nescio, Sar Draconis etc.
I have never discussed the issue of your claims of "highlander"
mentality, either in the past or in the present. Nor do I do so now.
Frankly I find the whole question quite a bore.
Draconis is not merely a 'troll' identity. He is an SRICF and former
BOTA member who supports Griffin. He is probably the source of the
information behind Griffin's now-suppressed attack on other R+C groups
- the 'Will the real GD stand up' essay where Griffin made a number of
embarrassing and obvious historical errors.
I was not involved in the publications which you cite, nor did I
furnish information contributing to the publication which you mention.
I was not approached in advance for advice regarding that publication,
and I learned of it only after the fact of its appearance on the
internet.
Draconis is more subtle in his support, his technique being to let out
carefully selected information to hint that there is some basis to
Griffn's arguments. For example a reference is made to a suppressed
chapter of SRIA history, which,according to Griffin,shows that the SRIA
tried to misappropriate the GD lineage of Kenneth Mackenzie.
There is an interesting chapter of SRIA history, however I consider it
readily available and not suppressed. Interpreting its contents as
"SRIA tried to misappropriate the GD lineage of Kenneth Mackenzie" is
not due to me, and I have never on any occasion either introduced or
supported that thesis. Nor was such a thesis ever published by anyone
with my approval.
I have not furnished copies of the SRIA history to anyone who published

on the subject either.
This is patently untrue. The suppressed chapter was to do with early
infighting in the SRIA of the 1870s. But most people don't know that
and posters like Draconis are able to trade on that ignorance.
Again you have imputed to me a thesis which I have never introduced nor

defended.
Another little white lie is to do with the Freres Aines group whose
rituals Griffin was at one time claiming to have as his second order
material. Draconis intimated that the Freres Aines [Elder Brothers of
the R+C] group was of great antiquity as an Italian cult researcher had
once commented in a book that it had an old documentation which
stretched back centuries.
The claim of great antiquity held by Freres Aines is documented as
being held by that group in a number of publications. They are
documented in the book "Sword of Wisdom"
dealing with GD history. My observation of the fact of their claim in
this regard should not be construed as my either supporting or
disputing their historical claims. The best documentation on the
subject is the "Legenda" published by the Freres Aines. I seriously
doubt that in gathering information for your present attack that you
have even consulted that authoritative publication. If you had done
so, then I think you would be in a position to give some specific
cites, which you have not done.
The Freres Aines did have some old documents, however they were merely
tax and real estate records mixed up with carefully forged esoteric
documents. The idea was to indicate that what was being referred to as
land transfers were in fact the handing down of a lineage from the
Templars.
Looking through the Legenda, the claim that we are dealing with tax and

real estate records does not leap out at me as an obvious
interpretation. You would have to do a lot more to convince me of your

thesis than that.
Can you give even one cite out of the Legenda to support your attack on

the french order?
In fact the Freres-Aines hail back to the dim and dark days of 1973 and
their creation involved a key member of the discredited Prieure de Sion
prank.
I have seen a number of interesting publications dealing with the
Freres-Aines, but none have ever set forth such a curious thesis. And
if this is your own original thesis, then you have not even named
anyone specifically.
At that time, the land and tax documents were presented to a number of
occultists in Belgium along with the carefully inserted forged
'esoteric' documents. They are a classic case of the old examiner's
comment. 'Sir, your essay is both good and original. But the part
that is original is not good, and the part that is good is not
original.'
I wish you would give some citations to publications supporting your
view for further study.
Failing to do so will probably result in your comments being discounted

and ultimately discredited, at least by me.
The Freres-Aines rituals are not particularly special - they have been
circulating privately in French and Spanish for years and are no more a
genuine second order connection than any other email you might receive
with a scanned document attached. I have them myself. Further, they
are of no great age.
I doubt that the written Freres-Aines rituals by themselves would do
anyone any good. Had you ever received an authentic transmission of
the material, so that you knew how to DO the alchemy, however, it might

be a different story.
On such wondrous foundations are modern Golden Dawns built. An
'esoteric current' which harnesses 'occult energies' contained within
old tax documents. Magnificent.
The Freres-Aines is an independant theurgical/alchemical Order in no
way dependant upon "Golden Dawns" for its transmission. Also, from an
alchemical point of view, the validity of its teachings depends only on

whether from a pragmatic aspect, that they "work", or not, and not at
all on any historical claims, no matter how speculative or contentious.

Practical alchemists are well aware that what the Freres teaches and
practices is in line with centuries of alchemical tradition, and that
it does produce laboratory results. One of its principal exponents
resides today in India, but he has no connection with "Golden Dawns."
Shades of Umberto Eco's 'Templar' laundry list.
Sorry, I am not involved with contentious "Freres Aines" issues or
claims, nor with the contentious SRIA thesis which you also mention,
but which was not ever published by me, nor ever published by anyone
else with my approval.
Sar Draconis

Reply



4. ***@yahoo.co.uk
Nov 9, 12:41 pm show options
You are consistently to be found in the same threads, supporting the
Griffin thesis. And never alerting anyone to facts which might damage

that thesis, but of which you were aware. Your support is common
knowledge. But I guess that isn't mentioned in the Legenda either .
. .

[[The claim of great antiquity held by Freres Aines is documented as
being held by that group in a number of publications. They are
documented in the book "Sword of Wisdom"
dealing with GD history. ]]

Which, as you and I know, is a mixture of lies, innuendo and rubbish
from start to finish.

But which one of us doesn't have the balls to say it ?

I really do enjoy filling in your enticing 'blanks' you know.

Indeed I have seen the Legenda. But as it is written by the order, it
does not deal with the more private facts of its formation.

And did I say these documents were even in the Legenda ? No. So your
remaining points are superfluous to the argument.

[[I have seen a number of interesting publications dealing with the
Freres-Aines, but none have ever set forth such a curious thesis. And
if this is your own original thesis, then you have not even named
anyone specifically. ]]

I would suggest that if you keep your nose buried in the Legenda and
ignore other sources, it kind of stands to reason that you won't
find other facts.

Can I suggest a visit to the Augustan Society near Los Angeles ?

And maybe a look at the career of a member of that group. A woodland
haircutter, nominally at least. I commend that course of action to
you.

No one is saying FAR+C is built on the GD. In fact, it's the other
way around, or at least it was for a while for the Griffin attempt at a

GD.

[[The Freres-Aines is an independant theurgical/alchemical Order in no
way dependant upon "Golden Dawns" for its transmission. Also, from an
alchemical point of view, the validity of its teachings depends only on


whether from a pragmatic aspect, that they "work", or not, and not at
all on any historical claims, no matter how speculative or
contentious.]]

Which they are. If you can recognise that, you might be moving towards

something of an understanding of them.

Whether one of its adepts lives in India is neither here nor there.
Another lives in Portugal, another in New Zealand. Another in the
Philippines. I will try to contact the person in India, at least one
of the others knows all the living members.

Reply


lux73 defamation troll assaults the R+C brethren

5. Sar Draconis
Nov 9, 7:23 pm show options
You are consistently to be found in the same threads, supporting the
Griffin thesis. And never alerting anyone to facts which might damage
that thesis, but of which you were aware. Your support is common
knowledge. But I guess that isn't mentioned in the Legenda either .
I really don't know what you mean by the "Griffin thesis." I assume it

means that you hate everyone who doesn't come out attacking Griffin the

same way you do. Really though, I don't have anything to do with
something called a "Griffrin thesis."
It is too bad that your hatred of Griffin has now led you also to
attack the french order online, a wholly innocent third party.
Incidentally, when the G L of CA received your wild and hopeless screed

attacking me personally, it was quickly filed in an appropriate
location - - - the nearest waste basket.
. .
[[The claim of great antiquity held by Freres Aines is documented as
being held by that group in a number of publications. They are
documented in the book "Sword of Wisdom"
dealing with GD history. ]]
Which, as you and I know, is a mixture of lies, innuendo and rubbish
from start to finish.
It is regrettable that your jealosy of competing historians, in
addition to your hatred of Griffin, has now led you also to attack
IIthell Colquhoun and her fine book, "Sword of Wisdom." The first
american edition of her book, published in 1975, discusses the freres.
According to you, the freres was a fraudulant creation made in 1973,
which gave Colquhoun a scant 2 years to set down documentation on them
in her publication. Thus, on page 269 of her 1975 treatise on the
History of the Golden Dawn, we read:
"Roger Caro, author of Pleiade Alchemique (1967) and Concordances
Alchemiques (1968) has also published a coloured photographic record of

the Great Work in its different stages and is associated with a
fraternity known as Les Freres Aines de la Rose Croix which operates
two Temples, the Ajunta and its offshoot the Vrehappada. Their members

are European adepts, some of whom have taken magical names in Sanskrit
. . ."

So we know from Colquhoun that Concordances Alchemiques was published
in 1968. I am looking at a copy now, and it shows the symbol of the
Freres on its cover, and refers to the Ajunta. Thus, the freres was
already in existance in 1968, a full five years before the date of 1973

which you assign.

The coloured plates mentioned by Colquhoun were published in 1967, and
also refer to the freres.
But which one of us doesn't have the balls to say it ?
I really do enjoy filling in your enticing 'blanks' you know.
Indeed I have seen the Legenda. But as it is written by the order, it
does not deal with the more private facts of its formation.
The Legenda sets forth the official documented history according to the

freres. And now you admit that it makes no use of tax documents, and
furthermore, that you are well aware of that fact. Therefore your
accusations against the freres are baseless and unsupported, by your
own admission. The date you assign for their creation (1973) is now
also known and proven to be a wholly false invention which you made up
out of a twisted hatred for Griffin, and all for no other reason than
that some time very long ago Griffin happened to mention them somewhere

or other in one of his publications.
And did I say these documents were even in the Legenda ? No. So your
remaining points are superfluous to the argument.
You have already had a chance to come forth with your own documents to
support your attacks against the freres. You have now failed to do so.

Therefore we may rightfully dismiss your claims as "unproven
accusations."
[[I have seen a number of interesting publications dealing with the
Freres-Aines, but none have ever set forth such a curious thesis. And
if this is your own original thesis, then you have not even named
anyone specifically. ]]
I would suggest that if you keep your nose buried in the Legenda and
ignore other sources, it kind of stands to reason that you won't
find other facts.
Can I suggest a visit to the Augustan Society near Los Angeles ?
Now your hatred of Griffin is leading you to attack yet another fourth
unaffiliated party. Sorry but I never even heard of them before. But

I must presume that your present attack against them is just as
baseless as the one you made against the freres.
- Show quoted text -
















It is well known that the traditions of alchemy go back millenia. It
is also well known that the freres and their offshoots are among the
foremost living exponents of that tradition. Therefore, the tradition

of the freres goes back millenia.
Whether one of its adepts lives in India is neither here nor there.
Another lives in Portugal, another in New Zealand. Another in the
Philippines. I will try to contact the person in India, at least one
of the others knows all the living members.
You can contact anyone you want.
Sorry but you had a chance to produce some material or citations. I
already warned you what would be the consequence of failing to document

your fraudulant thesis. Now your credibility is utterly destroyed, at
least insofar as I am concerned.

SAR

Reply



6. Sar Draconis
Nov 10, 7:15 am show options

- Show quoted text -
























A minor typo correction: The "coloured photographic record of the Great

Work" referred to by Colquhoun is a publication of F.A.R.C. entitled
"Tout le Grand Oeuvre Photographie", Cliches de Kamala-Jnana +
(F.A.R.C. Superieur de Temple Ajunta, and further subtitled
Commentaire des cliches par Rogar Caro. The date on the publication is

September 15, 1968. This is a full five years prior to the date of
1973 ascribed by defamation troll lux73 for the earliest origin of
F.A.R.C., and showing that his attack on the F.A.R.C. is not grounded
in either authentic information, or in sound scholarship. The Preface
of the 1968 F.A.R.C. publication begins with the words:
"C'est une joie pour moi que d'apporter mon temoignage a la magnifique
realisation do notre grand ami ROGER CARO . . ."

It is said that an english translation of the 1968 F.A.R.C. document
can be obtained from Master Petrinus in Portugal, who conducts online
training discussions in performing F.A.R.C. alchemical operations. It
is curious therefore that defamation troll lux73 would be unaware of
it, as well as the fact that the publication proves that F.A.R.C.
predates his assignment of origin at 1973, since he claims to be in
contact with all the F.A.R.C. adepti around the world, including
Portugal. This consideration leads me to wonder whether the defamation

troll's claims in regard to F.A.R.C. adepti contacts could even be
credited.

SAR

- Show quoted text -



Reply


SAR's trolling again

7. ***@yahoo.co.uk
Nov 10, 12:23 pm show options
Dear oh dear. Attacking the french online ? More inaccuracies. I
said that the FAR+C's history is speculative and it is acknowledged to
be a creation of the early 70s. I never said anything about the value
of their work. Discernment, SAR, discernment.

And now you have me attacking the Augustan Society too ? More dear oh
dears ! Go and see them, SAR, go and see them. Inform yourself for a
change.

Research, just occasionally, involves talking to people who were there,

rather than just sitting in California indulging in pseudo-intellectual

abstractions to the effect that just because something is mentioned in
1968, that it was a going concern in 1968.

For those who can't follow SAR's obvious mistake, it boils down to this

: Caro was dropping hints as to FAR+C's existence and talking about
it in his publications a long time before he actually got the group
going. By doing so, he built up a strong core membership.

That the group didn't exist [except in Caro's head] before 1973 didn't
matter, since the potted history he gave to members provided indicated
that it originated in 1314 anyway !

For those who haven't read it, in Sword of Wisdom, Ithell Colquhoun
assembled whatever gossip and documentation she had on anything
Rosicrucian and set it down in what purported to be a biography of
Mathers. It is nothing of the sort.

As a person fishing for information, and FAR+C being a new group in
search of credibility, that the two found each other is hardly
surprising. It is more surprising that they took two years to do it.

So, Ithell Colquhoun's is 'a fine book' ? SAR, you really need to
update your library.

[[, at
least insofar as I am concerned. ]]

This doesn't concern you. I'm warning people about you, not debating
you, which is a pointless endeavour, something I realised a long time
ago when I followed up some of your leads and realised their inherently

bogus nature.

Why would I care in the slightest about the GL of CA ? Not every
person who looks into history is a Mason in the state of California.

Some of us even travel to our sources and talk to the horse's mouth, as

it were. Strange but true.

A bientot.

Reply



8. ***@yahoo.co.uk
Nov 10, 1:36 pm show options
The sad truth about the Freres-Aines so-called 'interesting
documentation'. This is from a PoS researcher called Tim Foix-Carmain.


This odd mix of documents was taken to an occult convention at Liege in

1973, and it was there that FAR+C really got under way, using a
reception ritual that Caro had written the previous year :

"Thanks for your insights, and your username, "templeofajunta", is a
pretty clear indication of the fact that your familiarity with the
matter, or at least the key players and organziations, is not
incidental. As I'm sure you are already aware, "Jean Deleuvre" and
"Kamala Jnana" were pseudonyms used by the creator and "Imperator" of
the Freres-Aines de la Rose+Croix, the late Roger Caro. He also penned

the foreword to his own book, "The Great Work Photographed", writing as

"the late" Bishop Jacques d'Ossa, Imperator of the Temple of Ajunta -
an actual person who was very much alive at the time, though not named
d'Ossa and not a bishop. Killing him off in far-off Biafra was an
effective way of disguising any connection to the real "d'Ossa".

In the year and five months since I wrote that message, the missing
papers have indeed been located in a private collection of a Templar
enthusiast in Europe, and I will have the opportunity to view them
myself when I visit the owner next Spring. As you rightly surmised,
they have not turned out to be what I recalled from seeing them as a
nine-year-old boy. There are some old, fragile pieces, though not as
old as the 14th century (the oldest among them being 17th century).
These contain rather general historical details about the family's
early holdings from the time they became landowners (1316) and were
compiled as what were called "preuves de noblesse", which families had
to furnish to authorities every few generations to preserve their tax
exemptions and other legal privileges. These documents served as
summaries listing older documents or notary's copies of documents
submitted as back-up. They are not uncommon as families were required
to keep them, bearing the seal and signature of the King's reporter, to

be passed down from generation to generation until called upon to
furnish them again. What has apparently not survived are the
supporting documents referenced in these letters, some of which, when
they existed, went back to the early 14th century and referenced Pope
John XXII and the gift of former Templar houses in Languedoc and
Provence to his brother Pierre, my ancestor, and to several nephews.
They are mentioned in the summaries, but the originals no longer exist
- and thus there is nothing "esoteric" to be gleaned from them. This,
perhaps, is why my grandfather and his associate, the late Forest
Barber, decided to fabricate replacements, complete with esoteric hints

and clues that Barber's associate Roger Caro would incorporate into his

"legenda" of the Freres-Aines de la Rose+Croix in 1970. Ergo, the old
"Templar" parchments I remember seeing as a kid were in fact very
well-executed forgeries, not nearly as old as I was at the time. These

were what was being passed around as provenance for Caro's
"Freres-Aines". Names of historical persons from whom land and usage
rights were acquired were turned into "Templar hermeticists" like
"Gaston de la Pierre Phoebus", who was in fact Count Gaston II of Foix,

father of Gaston III "Phoebus" - hence "Gaston, le pere de Phoebus".
Even "Johannes Marcus Larmenius" makes an appearance under his real
name, Count Jean de l'Armagnac, along with later "Imperators", his
grandson and great-grandson Jean and Bernard "Arminiacus". So, there
you have it, your insights and caution were well placed. Caro's
"Freres-Aines de la Rose+Croix" is a hoax based on forged documents,
and I'm sorry to say my own grandfather was part of the scheme.

The surname of Pope John XXII and his brother Pierre, from whom I
descend, was "Duese". In Latin, this is transcribed as "d'Ossa". My
grandfather's name was Jack, rather than Jacques, and he was a
Protestant pastor rather than a Gnostic bishop. And while my ancestor
did benefit from the demise of the Templars (who were arrested 697
years ago today, in fact) thanks to his brother the Pope, who in turn
while still Cardinal Duese was one of the two Papal legates who drafted

the opinion condemning the Templars, I'm assured by the collector who
has the documents that the few authentic papers contain nothing even
slightly esoteric. He keeps and values the forgeries for the oddities
that they are."

Reply



9. Sar Draconis
Nov 10, 6:00 pm show options
This doesn't concern you. I'm warning people about you, not debating
you, which is a pointless endeavour, something I realised a long time
ago when I followed up some of your leads and realised their inherently
bogus nature.
You agree then, that the defamatory intent of your present posts is
clear. Unfortunately, it places your present online publications 90
degrees orthogonal to the focus of genuine scholarship. I regret that
you need to go to such elaborate lengths to attack other arcane groups
such as FARC just to get at me. But if I recall correctly, it was
really Griffin you were trying to attack, and you were attacking me
because I would not oppose Griffin.
A number of people in the families cited in the documents are well
known historically to have been interested in alchemy. Unfortunately,
a familial lineage is not quite identical to an arcane lineage. So it
is not entirely clear that your publications have any bearing on the
arcane questions at all. In a word, the alchemy stands on its own, or
not. The question of whether or not Caro received and transmitted an
operative arcane tradition is really entirely outside the scope of
questions of old land documents, or anything that your arguments touch.

Thus, your comments, while not wholly uninteresting, are irrelevant to

the subject of the study of alchemy itself, or the transmission of
arcane alchemical lineages.

I would encourage you however to continue with your studies leading
hopefully to future publications analysing the Legenda and other
related documents. It should be interesting to see also the response
(if any) of Caro's successors and students. Somehow I suspect that
they will not bat an eye over it. Unfortunately, my own published
study on the subject doesn't even address the controversy per se, since

it simply notes that the FARC exists and makes certain historical
claims. These claims, as I said, I noted, although I neither
supported nor contested them. Thus, your present defamatory attack
against me is also baseless. I'm sorry, but this means that you really

aren't a very good defamation troll, even though I will credit that you

do try very, very hard.

It is still not clear to me that the FARC did not already exist in
1968, since all that you have presented is merely hearsay evidence on
the subject. This is really hardly very convincing.

Best regards,
SAR

- Show quoted text -



Reply


Several lame attempts of disruption by a Griffin/Hevia troll

10. ***@yahoo.co.uk
Nov 10, 7:12 pm show options
People noting SAR's discussion of Freres-Aines history may note that my

dialogue with a researcher and conversations with former members of the

order is held by SAR to constitute 'hearsay'.

SAR on the other hand prefers a 'Legenda' which insists on a seven
hundred year lineage about which there is no evidence at all- but
plenty of wild goose chases.

I think a point that emerges from this whole thing is that just because

a thing is written down, does not make it inherently likely to be true.


I mean, does anyone really believe for a minute that Crowley (or the
'A.Croweey' of certain Freres-Aines documents) inherited the
grandmastership of Freres-Aines from Rudolf Steiner ?

Is that really likely ?

As for the alleged marathon 1916-69 grandmastership of d'Ossa, it is
effectively blown out of the water by the dialogue with d'Ossa's
grandson who happily talks of the falsification of the documents.

SAR at least admits that some things are not clear to him. At least
we're part of the way there, then. The Freres-Aines can of worms has
not fully opened up to any of us yet. We are still working on it.

What is 'defamatory' about recognising that the Freres-Aines is
historically built on shaky sands, and that GD structures built on it
are inherently shaky too ? Nothing.

Though the presence of certain bush lawyers and their kneejerk
definitions is not unknown to this forum. But regardless, in this
case, if SAR feels a bit rattled, it may be a case of a frater who doth

protest too much, if one examines his own postings over the years.

What I hope there is here, is an appreciation that a full discussion of

facts is better than enticing snippets taken out of context in support
of an agenda.

To that end, I'd happily see SAR's study and any other information.
I'm sure in the interests of getting a full consideration of all the
facts, he'll post it online and reference it.

A distinction is made between a familial lineage and a point made, to
what end I'm unsure, that this is not identical to an arcane lineage.
Indeed, sometimes arcane lineages are found within families, but the
distinction between the two is irrelevant here.

The point here is that a familial lineage which had the peculiar
quality of being connected to the Templars has been misappropriated to
insinuate that there was an arcane lineage.

And, given that the Freres-Aines have supplied no other lineage, the
story of this familial lineage, with its admission that a man involved
in both it and the arcane lineage of the Freres-Aines was part of a
plan to falsify documents is entirely relevant, I would have thought.

Certainly it blows a rather large hole of 53 years between the end of
the supposed Crowley grandmastership and Caro taking up the reins.

There is no direct attack on Griffin either. But it is a fact that
part of Griffin's claim of superiority over other GD groups has over
the years rested on the supposed history and lineages of his group.
This is apparent in SAR's support of Griffin and other essays penned by

the likes of Ruggiu.

This superiority relies on large measure on the credit to which one can

give to the public history of the Freres-Aines.

And clearly, one cannot give it much credit at all.
Sar Draconis
2005-11-11 07:18:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by c***@yahoo.com
A Very interesting discussion has arisin starter by a certain Soror LVX
93 regarding the questionable origins of the French Rosicrucian Order
the FAR+C and its Rosicrucian affiliation (or lack thereof). Below you
will find a recapitulation of the discussion thus far.
Soror LVX, your thesis is very interisting thus far. Before I add
anything further to the discussion, however, I would like to here your
opinion on one thing. Do you believe that the Sociatas Rosicruciana in
Anglia has a legitimate Rosicrucian lineal affiliation, and if so, from
whence does it arise?
- Le Chevalier De La Rose
Dear Le Chavalier de la Rose,

You will note that I have preferred the french rather than the Flemish
spelling of your name. I hope that you will not take offence at the
liberty I have taken with the spelling of your name.

I prefer to translate the french word "filiation" into english as
"lineage." Therefore, I would not pose the question in terms of
"Rosicrucian lineal affiliation," but instead, would use the term
"Rosicrucian lineage."

In order to ascertain the answer to that question, let us turn to the
well known historical account of Roger Caro, i.e., the famous
"Legenda.", and incorporate the iron claptrap logic of the defamation
troll lux73 Himself. Page 103 and following sets forth the historical
aspects of the creation of diverse rosicrucian orders. Item 19 in that
list refers to the "Foundation of the Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia"
in the year 1865. Now by the reasoning of the bee gee lux73 defamation
troll, there was a forged document involved somewhere in the
composition of the "Legenda." The bee gee lux73 troll is unable to
identify the specific document which was forged, but he proceeds to
draw the sweeping conclusion that therefore all historical aspects set
forth in the Legenda must be false. Hence, since the Societas
Rosicruciana in Anglia is referred to in "the Legenda", we may conclude
that it has "no" Rosicrucian lineage, at least, according to the
defamation troll's logic.

Best regards,
SAR
Post by c***@yahoo.com
Nov 8, 2:26 pm show options
Thus Mr. Griffin and Mr. Hevia, in their attempt to appear as the
"real" or "authentic" Golden Dawn cannot attent such a meeting for it
would mean to give credit to Groups other than their own and people
other then themselves. This is behaviour thathas been called
"highlander" mentality by others and been rebutted by above mentioned
Griffin/Hevia troll GDtruthseeker or Nomen Nescio, Sar Draconis etc.
Draconis is not merely a 'troll' identity. He is an SRICF and former
BOTA member who supports Griffin. He is probably the source of the
information behind Griffin's now-suppressed attack on other R+C groups
- the 'Will the real GD stand up' essay where Griffin made a number of
embarrassing and obvious historical errors.
Draconis is more subtle in his support, his technique being to let out
carefully selected information to hint that there is some basis to
Griffn's arguments. For example a reference is made to a suppressed
chapter of SRIA history, which,according to Griffin,shows that the SRIA
tried to misappropriate the GD lineage of Kenneth Mackenzie.
This is patently untrue. The suppressed chapter was to do with early
infighting in the SRIA of the 1870s. But most people don't know that
and posters like Draconis are able to trade on that ignorance.
Another little white lie is to do with the Freres Aines group whose
rituals Griffin was at one time claiming to have as his second order
material. Draconis intimated that the Freres Aines [Elder Brothers of
the R+C] group was of great antiquity as an Italian cult researcher had
once commented in a book that it had an old documentation which
stretched back centuries.
The Freres Aines did have some old documents, however they were merely
tax and real estate records mixed up with carefully forged esoteric
documents. The idea was to indicate that what was being referred to as
land transfers were in fact the handing down of a lineage from the
Templars.
In fact the Freres-Aines hail back to the dim and dark days of 1973 and
their creation involved a key member of the discredited Prieure de Sion
prank.
At that time, the land and tax documents were presented to a number of
occultists in Belgium along with the carefully inserted forged
'esoteric' documents. They are a classic case of the old examiner's
comment. 'Sir, your essay is both good and original. But the part
that is original is not good, and the part that is good is not
original.'
The Freres-Aines rituals are not particularly special - they have been
circulating privately in French and Spanish for years and are no more a
genuine second order connection than any other email you might receive
with a scanned document attached. I have them myself. Further, they
are of no great age.
On such wondrous foundations are modern Golden Dawns built. An
'esoteric current' which harnesses 'occult energies' contained within
old tax documents. Magnificent.
Shades of Umberto Eco's 'Templar' laundry list.
Reply
3. Sar Draconis
Nov 8, 6:57 pm show options
Dear soror_lux73
Post by c***@yahoo.com
Thus Mr. Griffin and Mr. Hevia, in their attempt to appear as the
"real" or "authentic" Golden Dawn cannot attent such a meeting for it
would mean to give credit to Groups other than their own and people
other then themselves. This is behaviour thathas been called
"highlander" mentality by others and been rebutted by above mentioned
Griffin/Hevia troll GDtruthseeker or Nomen Nescio, Sar Draconis etc.
I have never discussed the issue of your claims of "highlander"
mentality, either in the past or in the present. Nor do I do so now.
Frankly I find the whole question quite a bore.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
Draconis is not merely a 'troll' identity. He is an SRICF and former
BOTA member who supports Griffin. He is probably the source of the
information behind Griffin's now-suppressed attack on other R+C groups
- the 'Will the real GD stand up' essay where Griffin made a number of
embarrassing and obvious historical errors.
I was not involved in the publications which you cite, nor did I
furnish information contributing to the publication which you mention.
I was not approached in advance for advice regarding that publication,
and I learned of it only after the fact of its appearance on the
internet.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
Draconis is more subtle in his support, his technique being to let out
carefully selected information to hint that there is some basis to
Griffn's arguments. For example a reference is made to a suppressed
chapter of SRIA history, which,according to Griffin,shows that the SRIA
tried to misappropriate the GD lineage of Kenneth Mackenzie.
There is an interesting chapter of SRIA history, however I consider it
readily available and not suppressed. Interpreting its contents as
"SRIA tried to misappropriate the GD lineage of Kenneth Mackenzie" is
not due to me, and I have never on any occasion either introduced or
supported that thesis. Nor was such a thesis ever published by anyone
with my approval.
I have not furnished copies of the SRIA history to anyone who published
on the subject either.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
This is patently untrue. The suppressed chapter was to do with early
infighting in the SRIA of the 1870s. But most people don't know that
and posters like Draconis are able to trade on that ignorance.
Again you have imputed to me a thesis which I have never introduced nor
defended.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
Another little white lie is to do with the Freres Aines group whose
rituals Griffin was at one time claiming to have as his second order
material. Draconis intimated that the Freres Aines [Elder Brothers of
the R+C] group was of great antiquity as an Italian cult researcher had
once commented in a book that it had an old documentation which
stretched back centuries.
The claim of great antiquity held by Freres Aines is documented as
being held by that group in a number of publications. They are
documented in the book "Sword of Wisdom"
dealing with GD history. My observation of the fact of their claim in
this regard should not be construed as my either supporting or
disputing their historical claims. The best documentation on the
subject is the "Legenda" published by the Freres Aines. I seriously
doubt that in gathering information for your present attack that you
have even consulted that authoritative publication. If you had done
so, then I think you would be in a position to give some specific
cites, which you have not done.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
The Freres Aines did have some old documents, however they were merely
tax and real estate records mixed up with carefully forged esoteric
documents. The idea was to indicate that what was being referred to as
land transfers were in fact the handing down of a lineage from the
Templars.
Looking through the Legenda, the claim that we are dealing with tax and
real estate records does not leap out at me as an obvious
interpretation. You would have to do a lot more to convince me of your
thesis than that.
Can you give even one cite out of the Legenda to support your attack on
the french order?
Post by c***@yahoo.com
In fact the Freres-Aines hail back to the dim and dark days of 1973 and
their creation involved a key member of the discredited Prieure de Sion
prank.
I have seen a number of interesting publications dealing with the
Freres-Aines, but none have ever set forth such a curious thesis. And
if this is your own original thesis, then you have not even named
anyone specifically.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
At that time, the land and tax documents were presented to a number of
occultists in Belgium along with the carefully inserted forged
'esoteric' documents. They are a classic case of the old examiner's
comment. 'Sir, your essay is both good and original. But the part
that is original is not good, and the part that is good is not
original.'
I wish you would give some citations to publications supporting your
view for further study.
Failing to do so will probably result in your comments being discounted
and ultimately discredited, at least by me.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
The Freres-Aines rituals are not particularly special - they have been
circulating privately in French and Spanish for years and are no more a
genuine second order connection than any other email you might receive
with a scanned document attached. I have them myself. Further, they
are of no great age.
I doubt that the written Freres-Aines rituals by themselves would do
anyone any good. Had you ever received an authentic transmission of
the material, so that you knew how to DO the alchemy, however, it might
be a different story.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
On such wondrous foundations are modern Golden Dawns built. An
'esoteric current' which harnesses 'occult energies' contained within
old tax documents. Magnificent.
The Freres-Aines is an independant theurgical/alchemical Order in no
way dependant upon "Golden Dawns" for its transmission. Also, from an
alchemical point of view, the validity of its teachings depends only on
whether from a pragmatic aspect, that they "work", or not, and not at
all on any historical claims, no matter how speculative or contentious.
Practical alchemists are well aware that what the Freres teaches and
practices is in line with centuries of alchemical tradition, and that
it does produce laboratory results. One of its principal exponents
resides today in India, but he has no connection with "Golden Dawns."
Post by c***@yahoo.com
Shades of Umberto Eco's 'Templar' laundry list.
Sorry, I am not involved with contentious "Freres Aines" issues or
claims, nor with the contentious SRIA thesis which you also mention,
but which was not ever published by me, nor ever published by anyone
else with my approval.
Sar Draconis
Reply
Nov 9, 12:41 pm show options
You are consistently to be found in the same threads, supporting the
Griffin thesis. And never alerting anyone to facts which might damage
that thesis, but of which you were aware. Your support is common
knowledge. But I guess that isn't mentioned in the Legenda either .
. .
[[The claim of great antiquity held by Freres Aines is documented as
being held by that group in a number of publications. They are
documented in the book "Sword of Wisdom"
dealing with GD history. ]]
Which, as you and I know, is a mixture of lies, innuendo and rubbish
from start to finish.
But which one of us doesn't have the balls to say it ?
I really do enjoy filling in your enticing 'blanks' you know.
Indeed I have seen the Legenda. But as it is written by the order, it
does not deal with the more private facts of its formation.
And did I say these documents were even in the Legenda ? No. So your
remaining points are superfluous to the argument.
[[I have seen a number of interesting publications dealing with the
Freres-Aines, but none have ever set forth such a curious thesis. And
if this is your own original thesis, then you have not even named
anyone specifically. ]]
I would suggest that if you keep your nose buried in the Legenda and
ignore other sources, it kind of stands to reason that you won't
find other facts.
Can I suggest a visit to the Augustan Society near Los Angeles ?
And maybe a look at the career of a member of that group. A woodland
haircutter, nominally at least. I commend that course of action to
you.
No one is saying FAR+C is built on the GD. In fact, it's the other
way around, or at least it was for a while for the Griffin attempt at a
GD.
[[The Freres-Aines is an independant theurgical/alchemical Order in no
way dependant upon "Golden Dawns" for its transmission. Also, from an
alchemical point of view, the validity of its teachings depends only on
whether from a pragmatic aspect, that they "work", or not, and not at
all on any historical claims, no matter how speculative or
contentious.]]
Which they are. If you can recognise that, you might be moving towards
something of an understanding of them.
Whether one of its adepts lives in India is neither here nor there.
Another lives in Portugal, another in New Zealand. Another in the
Philippines. I will try to contact the person in India, at least one
of the others knows all the living members.
Reply
lux73 defamation troll assaults the R+C brethren
5. Sar Draconis
Nov 9, 7:23 pm show options
Post by c***@yahoo.com
You are consistently to be found in the same threads, supporting the
Griffin thesis. And never alerting anyone to facts which might damage
that thesis, but of which you were aware. Your support is common
knowledge. But I guess that isn't mentioned in the Legenda either .
I really don't know what you mean by the "Griffin thesis." I assume it
means that you hate everyone who doesn't come out attacking Griffin the
same way you do. Really though, I don't have anything to do with
something called a "Griffrin thesis."
It is too bad that your hatred of Griffin has now led you also to
attack the french order online, a wholly innocent third party.
Incidentally, when the G L of CA received your wild and hopeless screed
attacking me personally, it was quickly filed in an appropriate
location - - - the nearest waste basket.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
. .
[[The claim of great antiquity held by Freres Aines is documented as
being held by that group in a number of publications. They are
documented in the book "Sword of Wisdom"
dealing with GD history. ]]
Which, as you and I know, is a mixture of lies, innuendo and rubbish
from start to finish.
It is regrettable that your jealosy of competing historians, in
addition to your hatred of Griffin, has now led you also to attack
IIthell Colquhoun and her fine book, "Sword of Wisdom." The first
american edition of her book, published in 1975, discusses the freres.
According to you, the freres was a fraudulant creation made in 1973,
which gave Colquhoun a scant 2 years to set down documentation on them
in her publication. Thus, on page 269 of her 1975 treatise on the
"Roger Caro, author of Pleiade Alchemique (1967) and Concordances
Alchemiques (1968) has also published a coloured photographic record of
the Great Work in its different stages and is associated with a
fraternity known as Les Freres Aines de la Rose Croix which operates
two Temples, the Ajunta and its offshoot the Vrehappada. Their members
are European adepts, some of whom have taken magical names in Sanskrit
. . ."
So we know from Colquhoun that Concordances Alchemiques was published
in 1968. I am looking at a copy now, and it shows the symbol of the
Freres on its cover, and refers to the Ajunta. Thus, the freres was
already in existance in 1968, a full five years before the date of 1973
which you assign.
The coloured plates mentioned by Colquhoun were published in 1967, and
also refer to the freres.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
But which one of us doesn't have the balls to say it ?
I really do enjoy filling in your enticing 'blanks' you know.
Indeed I have seen the Legenda. But as it is written by the order, it
does not deal with the more private facts of its formation.
The Legenda sets forth the official documented history according to the
freres. And now you admit that it makes no use of tax documents, and
furthermore, that you are well aware of that fact. Therefore your
accusations against the freres are baseless and unsupported, by your
own admission. The date you assign for their creation (1973) is now
also known and proven to be a wholly false invention which you made up
out of a twisted hatred for Griffin, and all for no other reason than
that some time very long ago Griffin happened to mention them somewhere
or other in one of his publications.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
And did I say these documents were even in the Legenda ? No. So your
remaining points are superfluous to the argument.
You have already had a chance to come forth with your own documents to
support your attacks against the freres. You have now failed to do so.
Therefore we may rightfully dismiss your claims as "unproven
accusations."
Post by c***@yahoo.com
[[I have seen a number of interesting publications dealing with the
Freres-Aines, but none have ever set forth such a curious thesis. And
if this is your own original thesis, then you have not even named
anyone specifically. ]]
I would suggest that if you keep your nose buried in the Legenda and
ignore other sources, it kind of stands to reason that you won't
find other facts.
Can I suggest a visit to the Augustan Society near Los Angeles ?
Now your hatred of Griffin is leading you to attack yet another fourth
unaffiliated party. Sorry but I never even heard of them before. But
I must presume that your present attack against them is just as
baseless as the one you made against the freres.
- Show quoted text -
It is well known that the traditions of alchemy go back millenia. It
is also well known that the freres and their offshoots are among the
foremost living exponents of that tradition. Therefore, the tradition
of the freres goes back millenia.
Post by c***@yahoo.com
Whether one of its adepts lives in India is neither here nor there.
Another lives in Portugal, another in New Zealand. Another in the
Philippines. I will try to contact the person in India, at least one
of the others knows all the living members.
You can contact anyone you want.
Sorry but you had a chance to produce some material or citations. I
already warned you what would be the consequence of failing to document
your fraudulant thesis. Now your credibility is utterly destroyed, at
least insofar as I am concerned.
SAR
Reply
6. Sar Draconis
Nov 10, 7:15 am show options
- Show quoted text -
A minor typo correction: The "coloured photographic record of the Great
Work" referred to by Colquhoun is a publication of F.A.R.C. entitled
"Tout le Grand Oeuvre Photographie", Cliches de Kamala-Jnana +
(F.A.R.C. Superieur de Temple Ajunta, and further subtitled
Commentaire des cliches par Rogar Caro. The date on the publication is
September 15, 1968. This is a full five years prior to the date of
1973 ascribed by defamation troll lux73 for the earliest origin of
F.A.R.C., and showing that his attack on the F.A.R.C. is not grounded
in either authentic information, or in sound scholarship. The Preface
"C'est une joie pour moi que d'apporter mon temoignage a la magnifique
realisation do notre grand ami ROGER CARO . . ."
It is said that an english translation of the 1968 F.A.R.C. document
can be obtained from Master Petrinus in Portugal, who conducts online
training discussions in performing F.A.R.C. alchemical operations. It
is curious therefore that defamation troll lux73 would be unaware of
it, as well as the fact that the publication proves that F.A.R.C.
predates his assignment of origin at 1973, since he claims to be in
contact with all the F.A.R.C. adepti around the world, including
Portugal. This consideration leads me to wonder whether the defamation
troll's claims in regard to F.A.R.C. adepti contacts could even be
credited.
SAR
- Show quoted text -
Reply
SAR's trolling again
Nov 10, 12:23 pm show options
Dear oh dear. Attacking the french online ? More inaccuracies. I
said that the FAR+C's history is speculative and it is acknowledged to
be a creation of the early 70s. I never said anything about the value
of their work. Discernment, SAR, discernment.
And now you have me attacking the Augustan Society too ? More dear oh
dears ! Go and see them, SAR, go and see them. Inform yourself for a
change.
Research, just occasionally, involves talking to people who were there,
rather than just sitting in California indulging in pseudo-intellectual
abstractions to the effect that just because something is mentioned in
1968, that it was a going concern in 1968.
For those who can't follow SAR's obvious mistake, it boils down to this
: Caro was dropping hints as to FAR+C's existence and talking about
it in his publications a long time before he actually got the group
going. By doing so, he built up a strong core membership.
That the group didn't exist [except in Caro's head] before 1973 didn't
matter, since the potted history he gave to members provided indicated
that it originated in 1314 anyway !
For those who haven't read it, in Sword of Wisdom, Ithell Colquhoun
assembled whatever gossip and documentation she had on anything
Rosicrucian and set it down in what purported to be a biography of
Mathers. It is nothing of the sort.
As a person fishing for information, and FAR+C being a new group in
search of credibility, that the two found each other is hardly
surprising. It is more surprising that they took two years to do it.
So, Ithell Colquhoun's is 'a fine book' ? SAR, you really need to
update your library.
[[, at
least insofar as I am concerned. ]]
This doesn't concern you. I'm warning people about you, not debating
you, which is a pointless endeavour, something I realised a long time
ago when I followed up some of your leads and realised their inherently
bogus nature.
Why would I care in the slightest about the GL of CA ? Not every
person who looks into history is a Mason in the state of California.
Some of us even travel to our sources and talk to the horse's mouth, as
it were. Strange but true.
A bientot.
Reply
Nov 10, 1:36 pm show options
The sad truth about the Freres-Aines so-called 'interesting
documentation'. This is from a PoS researcher called Tim Foix-Carmain.
This odd mix of documents was taken to an occult convention at Liege in
1973, and it was there that FAR+C really got under way, using a
"Thanks for your insights, and your username, "templeofajunta", is a
pretty clear indication of the fact that your familiarity with the
matter, or at least the key players and organziations, is not
incidental. As I'm sure you are already aware, "Jean Deleuvre" and
"Kamala Jnana" were pseudonyms used by the creator and "Imperator" of
the Freres-Aines de la Rose+Croix, the late Roger Caro. He also penned
the foreword to his own book, "The Great Work Photographed", writing as
"the late" Bishop Jacques d'Ossa, Imperator of the Temple of Ajunta -
an actual person who was very much alive at the time, though not named
d'Ossa and not a bishop. Killing him off in far-off Biafra was an
effective way of disguising any connection to the real "d'Ossa".
In the year and five months since I wrote that message, the missing
papers have indeed been located in a private collection of a Templar
enthusiast in Europe, and I will have the opportunity to view them
myself when I visit the owner next Spring. As you rightly surmised,
they have not turned out to be what I recalled from seeing them as a
nine-year-old boy. There are some old, fragile pieces, though not as
old as the 14th century (the oldest among them being 17th century).
These contain rather general historical details about the family's
early holdings from the time they became landowners (1316) and were
compiled as what were called "preuves de noblesse", which families had
to furnish to authorities every few generations to preserve their tax
exemptions and other legal privileges. These documents served as
summaries listing older documents or notary's copies of documents
submitted as back-up. They are not uncommon as families were required
to keep them, bearing the seal and signature of the King's reporter, to
be passed down from generation to generation until called upon to
furnish them again. What has apparently not survived are the
supporting documents referenced in these letters, some of which, when
they existed, went back to the early 14th century and referenced Pope
John XXII and the gift of former Templar houses in Languedoc and
Provence to his brother Pierre, my ancestor, and to several nephews.
They are mentioned in the summaries, but the originals no longer exist
- and thus there is nothing "esoteric" to be gleaned from them. This,
perhaps, is why my grandfather and his associate, the late Forest
Barber, decided to fabricate replacements, complete with esoteric hints
and clues that Barber's associate Roger Caro would incorporate into his
"legenda" of the Freres-Aines de la Rose+Croix in 1970. Ergo, the old
"Templar" parchments I remember seeing as a kid were in fact very
well-executed forgeries, not nearly as old as I was at the time. These
were what was being passed around as provenance for Caro's
"Freres-Aines". Names of historical persons from whom land and usage
rights were acquired were turned into "Templar hermeticists" like
"Gaston de la Pierre Phoebus", who was in fact Count Gaston II of Foix,
father of Gaston III "Phoebus" - hence "Gaston, le pere de Phoebus".
Even "Johannes Marcus Larmenius" makes an appearance under his real
name, Count Jean de l'Armagnac, along with later "Imperators", his
grandson and great-grandson Jean and Bernard "Arminiacus". So, there
you have it, your insights and caution were well placed. Caro's
"Freres-Aines de la Rose+Croix" is a hoax based on forged documents,
and I'm sorry to say my own grandfather was part of the scheme.
The surname of Pope John XXII and his brother Pierre, from whom I
descend, was "Duese". In Latin, this is transcribed as "d'Ossa". My
grandfather's name was Jack, rather than Jacques, and he was a
Protestant pastor rather than a Gnostic bishop. And while my ancestor
did benefit from the demise of the Templars (who were arrested 697
years ago today, in fact) thanks to his brother the Pope, who in turn
while still Cardinal Duese was one of the two Papal legates who drafted
the opinion condemning the Templars, I'm assured by the collector who
has the documents that the few authentic papers contain nothing even
slightly esoteric. He keeps and values the forgeries for the oddities
that they are."
Reply
9. Sar Draconis
Nov 10, 6:00 pm show options
Post by c***@yahoo.com
This doesn't concern you. I'm warning people about you, not debating
you, which is a pointless endeavour, something I realised a long time
ago when I followed up some of your leads and realised their inherently
bogus nature.
You agree then, that the defamatory intent of your present posts is
clear. Unfortunately, it places your present online publications 90
degrees orthogonal to the focus of genuine scholarship. I regret that
you need to go to such elaborate lengths to attack other arcane groups
such as FARC just to get at me. But if I recall correctly, it was
really Griffin you were trying to attack, and you were attacking me
because I would not oppose Griffin.
A number of people in the families cited in the documents are well
known historically to have been interested in alchemy. Unfortunately,
a familial lineage is not quite identical to an arcane lineage. So it
is not entirely clear that your publications have any bearing on the
arcane questions at all. In a word, the alchemy stands on its own, or
not. The question of whether or not Caro received and transmitted an
operative arcane tradition is really entirely outside the scope of
questions of old land documents, or anything that your arguments touch.
Thus, your comments, while not wholly uninteresting, are irrelevant to
the subject of the study of alchemy itself, or the transmission of
arcane alchemical lineages.
I would encourage you however to continue with your studies leading
hopefully to future publications analysing the Legenda and other
related documents. It should be interesting to see also the response
(if any) of Caro's successors and students. Somehow I suspect that
they will not bat an eye over it. Unfortunately, my own published
study on the subject doesn't even address the controversy per se, since
it simply notes that the FARC exists and makes certain historical
claims. These claims, as I said, I noted, although I neither
supported nor contested them. Thus, your present defamatory attack
against me is also baseless. I'm sorry, but this means that you really
aren't a very good defamation troll, even though I will credit that you
do try very, very hard.
It is still not clear to me that the FARC did not already exist in
1968, since all that you have presented is merely hearsay evidence on
the subject. This is really hardly very convincing.
Best regards,
SAR
- Show quoted text -
Reply
Several lame attempts of disruption by a Griffin/Hevia troll
Nov 10, 7:12 pm show options
People noting SAR's discussion of Freres-Aines history may note that my
dialogue with a researcher and conversations with former members of the
order is held by SAR to constitute 'hearsay'.
SAR on the other hand prefers a 'Legenda' which insists on a seven
hundred year lineage about which there is no evidence at all- but
plenty of wild goose chases.
I think a point that emerges from this whole thing is that just because
a thing is written down, does not make it inherently likely to be true.
I mean, does anyone really believe for a minute that Crowley (or the
'A.Croweey' of certain Freres-Aines documents) inherited the
grandmastership of Freres-Aines from Rudolf Steiner ?
Is that really likely ?
As for the alleged marathon 1916-69 grandmastership of d'Ossa, it is
effectively blown out of the water by the dialogue with d'Ossa's
grandson who happily talks of the falsification of the documents.
SAR at least admits that some things are not clear to him. At least
we're part of the way there, then. The Freres-Aines can of worms has
not fully opened up to any of us yet. We are still working on it.
What is 'defamatory' about recognising that the Freres-Aines is
historically built on shaky sands, and that GD structures built on it
are inherently shaky too ? Nothing.
Though the presence of certain bush lawyers and their kneejerk
definitions is not unknown to this forum. But regardless, in this
case, if SAR feels a bit rattled, it may be a case of a frater who doth
protest too much, if one examines his own postings over the years.
What I hope there is here, is an appreciation that a full discussion of
facts is better than enticing snippets taken out of context in support
of an agenda.
To that end, I'd happily see SAR's study and any other information.
I'm sure in the interests of getting a full consideration of all the
facts, he'll post it online and reference it.
A distinction is made between a familial lineage and a point made, to
what end I'm unsure, that this is not identical to an arcane lineage.
Indeed, sometimes arcane lineages are found within families, but the
distinction between the two is irrelevant here.
The point here is that a familial lineage which had the peculiar
quality of being connected to the Templars has been misappropriated to
insinuate that there was an arcane lineage.
And, given that the Freres-Aines have supplied no other lineage, the
story of this familial lineage, with its admission that a man involved
in both it and the arcane lineage of the Freres-Aines was part of a
plan to falsify documents is entirely relevant, I would have thought.
Certainly it blows a rather large hole of 53 years between the end of
the supposed Crowley grandmastership and Caro taking up the reins.
There is no direct attack on Griffin either. But it is a fact that
part of Griffin's claim of superiority over other GD groups has over
the years rested on the supposed history and lineages of his group.
This is apparent in SAR's support of Griffin and other essays penned by
the likes of Ruggiu.
This superiority relies on large measure on the credit to which one can
give to the public history of the Freres-Aines.
And clearly, one cannot give it much credit at all.
s***@yahoo.co.uk
2005-11-11 11:28:00 UTC
Permalink
We do not know anything about the SRIA's filiation other than the most
obvious ancestor, the near defunct society in Scotia that it was
chartered by.

And that a number of lies were told about it early on, particularly by
Westcott, and that these were debunked over time, mostly by the SRIA
itself. Maybe no one else cared very much ?

I am aware of the usual stories and the speculation in both editions of
Greensill. And some mention of a 'Golden Wasser' lodge. But that is
all.

In short order, we don't know.

_______

As for the latest semantics by SAR, all I can say is that it has the
hallmarks of a man clutching at straws.

How the Freres' fatally compromised history can be defended by an
attack on the SRIA is a little beyond me too.

I suppose when confronted with new and strange realities, some
personality types prefer to return to that which is comforting and
familiar to them.

But it does rather indicate that SAR's position and Griffin's is
one and the same, whatever previous denials SAR might have given.

And it's a rather frank admission that SAR has nothing substantive to
offer in defence of the Freres apart from endless quotes from his
bookshelf.

People can prefer my version or SAR's and Ruggiu's and come to their
own conclusions.

________________

But consider that the warning signs were all there.

Taking into account that the Freres 'cherry picking' of various famous
identities from history and building them into a lineage, which is what
the Legenda does, is far too close to Prieure de Sion for my liking.

The involvement of de Cherisey in the saga also means that any claim
associated with the group needs to be treated with the utmost caution.


And what of the passing of a lineage from Steiner to Crowley and to
every other famous occultist of the 19th and 20th century ?

Followed by a 53 year grandmaster-ship by an obscure 'bishop' who
mysteriously and conveniently dies in Biafra ? Obviously done to
remove him from the picture.

Consider that the real D'Ossa (Jack Duese) would likely have been
ten years old [?] when Crowley made him Grand Master.

Such is the quality of the written 'history' SAR is relying on.

The obscurity of D'Ossa, compared to the others, and the length of
his 'reign' too, is a hint that Barber, Driscoll and Caro wanted to
quarantine him off from those who might ask uncomfortable questions
about his identity and history. A likely danger given that he was the
GM just prior to Caro and that there would have surely been records and
living relatives who could have been found. Which is what happened.

Introvigne's penchant for dabbling in and building up far-right
pro-Catholic groups, (Group de Thebes et al) should have also sounded a
warning about the real value of his opinion on the Freres history and
his motives in offering such support in 'La Magie'.

But people will see what they want to see, sadly.

A warning shot was once given on alt.magick about the dangers of
believing the 'self deluded magi' no matter how 'well educated or
articulate they appear to be'.

I'll leave you to Google that one and work out who that warning was
about.
Sar Draconis
2005-11-12 22:09:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.co.uk
And it's a rather frank admission that SAR has nothing substantive to
offer in defence of the Freres apart from endless quotes from his
bookshelf.
Actually I have several vials of the Elixir made by an Adept of the
freres and a direct student of Caro. Eat your heart out.

SAR
s***@yahoo.co.uk
2005-11-11 12:24:38 UTC
Permalink
PS/

One more thing. If you are going to get seriously into the business of
being a pro-Griffin troll, you might want to consider that the 'enemy'
you are lining up for a further ineffectual attack is the Soci_e_tas
Rosicruciana, not the Soci_a_tas Rosicruciana.

Your poor spelling does rather give you away, I'm afraid, given the
consistency with which you mis-spell this particular word in postings
made under all of your various Usenet identities.

'Last yere I couldn't spell Rosacrution. This yere I are one !'
Post by c***@yahoo.com
Soror LVX, your thesis is very interisting thus far. Before I add
anything further to the discussion, however, I would like to here your
opinion on one thing. Do you believe that the Sociatas Rosicruciana in
Anglia has a legitimate Rosicrucian lineal affiliation, and if so, from
whence does it arise?
- Le Chevalier De La Rose
it much credit at all.
c***@yahoo.com
2005-11-11 19:27:49 UTC
Permalink
Dear Frater LVX Bristol,

Merci Beaucoup for correcting my English. I agree with you that the
origin stories of most orders are not what they claim to be. The origin
stories of the Golden Dawn are as suspect as are the origins of the
SRIA and the FAR+C (as well as of Freemasonry itself in the strictest
academic sense). The obvious conslusion is that, in the strictest
academic sense any and all 'lineal affiliation' of all of the above
must be regarded with a certain scepticism.

However, in the case of the historical Rosicrucians, I believe your
argument regarding lineal affiliation to be, in fact, a red herring.
Even from an academic hisotrical point of view it is clear tht the
earliest Rosicrucians did not concern themselves primarily with
historical research as is the case with the SRIA, and certainly not
with the hodge-podge of self development and new age mysticism that
predominates most modern nominally Rosicrucian groups.

The earlliest historical Rosicrucians were, rather, operative
ALCHEMISTS...and as alchemists they also practiced THEURGY to a certain
extent. Thus, despite the red herring of lineal affiliation which you
seek to throw as a bone of contention to discount the FAR+C, the FAR+C
nonetheless occupy a unique place in modern occultism in that they
actually occupy themselves with the same operative practices as did the
earliest historical Rosicrucians.

Unlike the SRIA, the FAR+C is an 'operative' alchemical order. Indeed,
the brothers of the FAR+C are practising alchemists. Perhaps you are
right in your contention that neither the SRIA nor the FAR+C can in the
strictest sense claim to be nominally Rosicrucian, but you are wrong as
well.....for the FAR+C indeed can claim to be 'operatively' Rosicrucian
which the SRIA can not.

In fact, the FAR+C are the inheritors and the operators of one
extremely important line of Rosicrucian esoteric transmission...the
alchemical 'wet way'. Thus, Monsieur, your depreciation of the FAR+C
betrays your academic bias. You are like a spectator watching a
football match. It is easy as spectator to criticise the players down
on the field. But, Monsieur, remember, that you are not a player
yourself. It is clear from the importance you give to 'lineal
affiliation' when discussing the FAR+C that you are most definately not
a practising alchemist, or you would have realized yourself the
silliness of your own argument.

In the light of the 'Opus Magnum'
-De La Rose
Post by s***@yahoo.co.uk
PS/
One more thing. If you are going to get seriously into the business of
being a pro-Griffin troll, you might want to consider that the 'enemy'
you are lining up for a further ineffectual attack is the Soci_e_tas
Rosicruciana, not the Soci_a_tas Rosicruciana.
Your poor spelling does rather give you away, I'm afraid, given the
consistency with which you mis-spell this particular word in postings
made under all of your various Usenet identities.
'Last yere I couldn't spell Rosacrution. This yere I are one !'
Post by c***@yahoo.com
Soror LVX, your thesis is very interisting thus far. Before I add
anything further to the discussion, however, I would like to here your
opinion on one thing. Do you believe that the Sociatas Rosicruciana in
Anglia has a legitimate Rosicrucian lineal affiliation, and if so, from
whence does it arise?
- Le Chevalier De La Rose
it much credit at all.
s***@yahoo.co.uk
2005-11-12 14:17:51 UTC
Permalink
Bristol ? Kind of an obvious guess, but not very inspired.

Bad scholarship and dubious claims are likely to attract criticism from
more than one quarter, you know.

A minor correction. Foix-Carmain's writings referred to the killing of
d'Ossa in the mythology of the FAR+C in Biafra. As did I yesterday.

Generally, it is considered to have been Kamala-Jnana who was allegedly
killed off in Biafra although some sources claim that of d'Ossa as
well. The Freres were almost legendary for trying to cover their
tracks with composite identities.

In any event it is irrelevant as K-J never existed and d'Ossa's history
was almost as much of a fiction. D'Ossa (Duese) was written up by
Caro, Barber and Driscoll as having been Imperator for such a long time
for a number of reasons.

The date of 1916 may have been chosen because some of Crowley's
movements in the US in that period are not recorded, whereas his 1918
involvements in the US are better chronicled. Therefore it could be
argued that he initiated d'Ossa in 1916 without anyone being able to
definitively prove that it was untrue.

D'Ossa was also convenient because if necessary, he could be produced -
or records of him could be produced, after either his claimed death in
1969 or real death in 1973. As a participant in the hoax he would be
likely to support Caro, Driscoll and Barber. And the claimed
Grand-Master before him, Crowley, was safely dead.

Barber is the important link here, as a player in both genealogical
fields and esoteric circles, he would have known the potential of
documents referencing the handing down of anything from the Templars,
and what they could be made to mean with a few selective additions.

The argument about lineal filiation, and the failure of the Freres to
demonstrate it, arises only because one modern GD order, that of
Griffin, have trumpeted it in their public declarations.

Unfortunately you continue to think that saying 'the SRIA is no better
than FAR+C' is an adequate defence . . .

Why do you think I care about the SRIA's legitimacy ? In fact, I
don't. Nor have I ever claimed to be a member of that body. Given it
puts itself out merely as a Rosicrucian study group, its own claim
appears to be rather modest.

If it trumpeted itself as the real Rosicrucians, it might well get
itself into the trouble that SAR and yourself have.

And I've never even touched on the arguments of alchemical transmission
- which you define as being Rosicrucian yourself, with what evidence I
don't know.

I've not raised this not because I'm unaware of alchemical
transmissions, but because what we're talking about here is the
publicly claimed history of a group, quite a different thing.

What I know about alchemy I'll keep to myself. I have other interests
apart from history.

But this particular crow has been squawking for some time, and it was
high time it had its head cut off.
c***@yahoo.com
2005-11-13 03:41:01 UTC
Permalink
My hat goes off to you, my dear Sister LVX, for as an historian you may
have merit!

There is one problem, however, as you seem to have cut the head from
the wrong crow! Indeed, I happened to read the article to which you
refer before it disappeared from the net more than two years ago. Even
in that previous incarnation, that particular bird never crowed to make
the claim you assert. Indeed, there has never been any claim made by
the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn to any sort of Rosicrucian
'lineal affiliation' deriving from the FAR+C!

There ARE, however, Adepts of the Rosicrucian Order of A+O known among
practicing alchemists to have actually PRODUCED the philosopher's stone
following the 'voie humide!' On the other hand, there are many brothers
of the FAR+C remaining until today hopelessly lost in the alchemical
labyrinth, despite the validity of the 'wet way'!

Excuse me, dear Sister, as I take no leave to offend, but you, until
now, have not yet shown yourself willing to even enter into the
labyrinth, let alone to wrest the secrets from the Minotaur lurking at
its center. Instead, you seem content merely to study the history of
those who themselves may have tread the labyrinth before you. Let me
give you a clue to aid you on your journey:

The secrets of Alchemy are the most well protected of the Western
Esoteric Tradition. Even if one were to invest a small fortune in
acquiring Rosicrucian alchemical documents, one would still NEVER find
the way to Minotaur at the center of the labyrinth, nor the way of safe
return. Many have tired it already...only to find themselves hopelessly
lost in the alchemical labyrinth. For there is one simple truth known
and proclaimed again and again down through the ages by the Philosohers
and Wise Sages of the Royal Art:

"The keys to the labyrinth are only whispered in the ear of the worthy
disciple by the Master Alchemist. For without the personal guidance of
a true Magister, the secrets of Alchemy a sealed book shall ever
remain!"

-Chevalier De La Pierre
Post by s***@yahoo.co.uk
Bristol ? Kind of an obvious guess, but not very inspired.
Bad scholarship and dubious claims are likely to attract criticism from
more than one quarter, you know.
A minor correction. Foix-Carmain's writings referred to the killing of
d'Ossa in the mythology of the FAR+C in Biafra. As did I yesterday.
Generally, it is considered to have been Kamala-Jnana who was allegedly
killed off in Biafra although some sources claim that of d'Ossa as
well. The Freres were almost legendary for trying to cover their
tracks with composite identities.
In any event it is irrelevant as K-J never existed and d'Ossa's history
was almost as much of a fiction. D'Ossa (Duese) was written up by
Caro, Barber and Driscoll as having been Imperator for such a long time
for a number of reasons.
The date of 1916 may have been chosen because some of Crowley's
movements in the US in that period are not recorded, whereas his 1918
involvements in the US are better chronicled. Therefore it could be
argued that he initiated d'Ossa in 1916 without anyone being able to
definitively prove that it was untrue.
D'Ossa was also convenient because if necessary, he could be produced -
or records of him could be produced, after either his claimed death in
1969 or real death in 1973. As a participant in the hoax he would be
likely to support Caro, Driscoll and Barber. And the claimed
Grand-Master before him, Crowley, was safely dead.
Barber is the important link here, as a player in both genealogical
fields and esoteric circles, he would have known the potential of
documents referencing the handing down of anything from the Templars,
and what they could be made to mean with a few selective additions.
The argument about lineal filiation, and the failure of the Freres to
demonstrate it, arises only because one modern GD order, that of
Griffin, have trumpeted it in their public declarations.
Unfortunately you continue to think that saying 'the SRIA is no better
than FAR+C' is an adequate defence . . .
Why do you think I care about the SRIA's legitimacy ? In fact, I
don't. Nor have I ever claimed to be a member of that body. Given it
puts itself out merely as a Rosicrucian study group, its own claim
appears to be rather modest.
If it trumpeted itself as the real Rosicrucians, it might well get
itself into the trouble that SAR and yourself have.
And I've never even touched on the arguments of alchemical transmission
- which you define as being Rosicrucian yourself, with what evidence I
don't know.
I've not raised this not because I'm unaware of alchemical
transmissions, but because what we're talking about here is the
publicly claimed history of a group, quite a different thing.
What I know about alchemy I'll keep to myself. I have other interests
apart from history.
But this particular crow has been squawking for some time, and it was
high time it had its head cut off.
s***@yahoo.co.uk
2005-11-13 18:48:02 UTC
Permalink
[[Excuse me, dear Sister, as I take no leave to offend, but you, until
now, have not yet shown yourself willing to even enter into the
labyrinth, . . . ]]

[[extraneous guff clipped]]

As I said, you have no idea who I am nor what my interests in alchemy
are. Do you know any serious practising alchemists who demonstrate
their alchemical work via Usenet postings ?

I did not claim that the Griffin HOGD claimed a lineal filiation from
the Freres, but that they trumpeted the Freres alleged, and now I
believe, debunked, lineal filiation.
Sar Draconis
2005-11-15 07:44:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.co.uk
Do you know any serious practising alchemists who demonstrate
their alchemical work via Usenet postings ?
Nowadays the Internet has become an amazingly colossal encyclopedia
available at the fingertips of anyone. So I found the following
link/quote on Caro's technique. The postings of Master Petrinus of
course are also quite useful.

http://www.rexresearch.com/adept/aa7hgau.htm

(3) Roger Caro & Kamala-Jnana ~
The French alchemical school of the Temple of Ajunta published a few
small hermetic texts (Pleiade Alchimique, Concordances Alchimiques,
etc) in the 1960s. The Complete Great Work Photographed includes 40
photographs of the Ars Magna as it was performed by Kamala-Jnana and
Roger Caro.

The method is described in classical alchemical language, but most of
the materials and methods are clearly described. Mercury was used to
produce a species of Philosophers' Stone. The process can be described
in chemical terms as follows: Prepare (1) b-meta-cinnabarite
(a-cinnabarite will not produce the same results, in my experience),
(2) a concentrated solution of a mixture of lime and potash and (3)
sulfureted potash (potassium polysulfide). Saturate the cinnabarite
with the lime-potash mixture solution, then dry it. Repeat several
times until albedo appears. Then saturate with a concentrated solution
of potassium polysulfide, and strip the solvent (methyl or ethyl
alcohol also can be used). Repeat this step until white needles appear
(the Dragon's Teeth). The color changes from yellow to orange to red.
The Stone is multiplied by grinding it to powder and repeating (7x) the
wash with lime-potash. At this point, the Stone emits lights ---
probably from the calcium sulfide byproduct of the reaction mixture.
Further elaboration and transmutation of lead to gold can be
accomplished according to the skill of the Artist.

SAR
Sar Draconis
2005-12-06 06:42:14 UTC
Permalink
The lux73 defamation troll's absurd claim that Caro fraudulantly
fabricated the historical techniques and methods of alchemy via forged
documents cannot stand up to the light of objective historical enquiry
into centuries of alchemical experimentation and endeavor in Europe.
Indeed, the troll when challenged proved unable to cite or provide even
one instance of a forged document contained in the Legenda, the epitome
lineage study provided by Caro. The historical alchemical endeavor
involved many figures of major and minor importance, such as the
religious luminary Jean de Paul (cited by Caro), and Isaac Newton,
famed for his formulation of the law of gravitation.

Caro's role in the history of alchemy was to provide for the modern
student an elucidation in modern scientific terms of the traditional
alchemical laboratory procedures, which in the publications of the
middle ages and the rennaissance, lay under thick veils of symbolism.
The magnitude of his achievement constitutes sufficient proof that Caro
received and revived the arcane traditions of alchemy.

For information on Newton's involvement with alchemy, the reader might
check out the following link:

webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/newton/index.jsp
Post by Sar Draconis
Post by s***@yahoo.co.uk
Do you know any serious practising alchemists who demonstrate
their alchemical work via Usenet postings ?
Nowadays the Internet has become an amazingly colossal encyclopedia
available at the fingertips of anyone. So I found the following
link/quote on Caro's technique. The postings of Master Petrinus of
course are also quite useful.
http://www.rexresearch.com/adept/aa7hgau.htm
(3) Roger Caro & Kamala-Jnana ~
The French alchemical school of the Temple of Ajunta published a few
small hermetic texts (Pleiade Alchimique, Concordances Alchimiques,
etc) in the 1960s. The Complete Great Work Photographed includes 40
photographs of the Ars Magna as it was performed by Kamala-Jnana and
Roger Caro.
The method is described in classical alchemical language, but most of
the materials and methods are clearly described. Mercury was used to
produce a species of Philosophers' Stone. The process can be described
in chemical terms as follows: Prepare (1) b-meta-cinnabarite
(a-cinnabarite will not produce the same results, in my experience),
(2) a concentrated solution of a mixture of lime and potash and (3)
sulfureted potash (potassium polysulfide). Saturate the cinnabarite
with the lime-potash mixture solution, then dry it. Repeat several
times until albedo appears. Then saturate with a concentrated solution
of potassium polysulfide, and strip the solvent (methyl or ethyl
alcohol also can be used). Repeat this step until white needles appear
(the Dragon's Teeth). The color changes from yellow to orange to red.
The Stone is multiplied by grinding it to powder and repeating (7x) the
wash with lime-potash. At this point, the Stone emits lights ---
probably from the calcium sulfide byproduct of the reaction mixture.
Further elaboration and transmutation of lead to gold can be
accomplished according to the skill of the Artist.
SAR
teletourgos
2005-12-06 14:41:32 UTC
Permalink
I don't think she mentioned the historical techniques and methods of
alchemy,did she ?

But it sure looks like she found evidence that Caro had forged the
lineage. I mean, the fellow's grandson admits it.

Whatever centures of alchemical enquiry might find, if Jean Jacques
d'Ossa was mentioned in the Legenda, which I don't have, then it looks
like that claim is piffle.

I guess since she found it and you didn't, you can't let it go ?

Flagellatus equinae moribundae.

Jean
teletourgos
2005-12-06 14:46:05 UTC
Permalink
You seem to have this bizzare knack of attempting to defend claims
no-one was making in the first place.

I don't think she mentioned the historical techniques and methods of
alchemy,did she ?

But it sure looks like she found evidence that Caro had forged the
lineage.

I mean, d'Ossa's grandson admits it.

Whatever centures of alchemical enquiry might find, if Jean Jacques
d'Ossa was mentioned in the Legenda, which I don't have, then it looks
like that claim is piffle.

I guess since she found it and you didn't, you can't let it go ?

Flagellatus equinae moribundae.

Jean
teletourgos
2005-12-06 16:21:34 UTC
Permalink
You seem to have this bizzare knack of attempting to defend claims
no-one was attacking in the first place.


I don't think she mentioned the historical techniques and methods of
alchemy,did she ?


But it sure looks like she found evidence that Caro had forged the
lineage.


I mean, d'Ossa's grandson admits it.


Whatever centures of alchemical enquiry might find, if Jean Jacques
d'Ossa was mentioned in the Legenda, which I don't have, then it looks
like that claim is piffle.


I guess since she found it and you didn't, you can't let it go ?


Flagellatus equinae moribundae.


Jean
teletourgos
2005-12-06 17:21:33 UTC
Permalink
You seem to have this bizzare knack of attempting to defend claims
no-one was attacking in the first place.

I don't think she mentioned the historical techniques and methods of
alchemy, did she ?

But it sure looks like she found evidence that Caro had forged the
lineage.

I mean, d'Ossa's grandson admits it.

Whatever centuries of alchemical enquiry might find, if Jean Jacques
d'Ossa was mentioned in the Legenda, which I don't have, then it looks
like that claim is piffle.

I guess since she found it and you didn't, you can't let it go ?

Flagellatus equinae moribundae.

Jean
Sar Draconis
2005-12-11 19:01:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.co.uk
The date of 1916 may have been chosen because some of Crowley's
movements in the US in that period are not recorded, whereas his 1918
involvements in the US are better chronicled. Therefore it could be
argued that he initiated d'Ossa in 1916 without anyone being able to
definitively prove that it was untrue.
The reference to Aleister Crowley is typical of the defamation troll's
mangled assaults on the reputation of Caro, and his lineage claims. In
fact, nowhere does the Legenda mention Crowley. Instead, page 58 of
the Legenda refers to a certain A. CROWEEY: the description in the
Legenda makes it clear that Caro is NOT referring to Aleister Crowley:

" Le 56e Imperator est un Irlandais, A. CROWEEY (1900 - 1916).
Chimiste de son etat, il mene une vie semi-religieuse. Marie a une
Francaise, Caroline FAILLE, il vient en France et s'engage dans la
Legion Etrangere pour soigner les blesses. Sa femme rentre egalement
dans un hopital militaire en tant qu'infirmiere. En 1916, il meurt en
secourant un blesse tombe en premiere ligne.

Le 57e Imperator est Jean-Jacques d'OSSA . . ."

Now Aleister Crowley was not Irish ("Irlandais"). He was not a
chemist. ("Chemiste do son etat . . .). Crowley did not mary a french
lady, Caroline FAILLE. Aleister Crowley did NOT go to France to join
the Foreign Legion in order to care for the injured. Aleister Crowley
did NOT die in 1916 while attending to an injured soldier on the front
lines. Thus, in EVERY DETAIL of his life set forth by Caro in the
Legenda, clearly the life of Aleister Crowley is NOT being referred to.
The name isn't even spelled Crowley: its spelled
CROWEEY, very different.

If the lux73 defamation troll is so off-base regarding her allegations
that Caro asserted Aleister Crowley as a predecessor, what must we do
when she asks us to believe her other outrageous claims, particularly
when she refers to the grandson of d'OSSA, but whom she says isn't even
named d'OSSA.

It is a case of "debunking the debunker"?

SAR
s***@yahoo.co.uk
2005-12-12 10:51:44 UTC
Permalink
LOL.

All I can say is that if you believe in the existence of an 'A
Croweey' who sounds like a mish-mash of Papus and Crowley - a typical
Caro technique - the same mix up occurs with the death of d'Ossa and
Kamala Jnana - then you'll believe anything.

I would suggest that anyone who wants to be put right on this should
surely contact Foix-Carmain rather than reading the re-hash of Caro's
farrago of twaddle, twisted and turned through the various swings and
roundabouts of the Caput Draconis' unusual take on reality.

This is a man who has bought a couple of expensive books for his shelf
and who is now having problems coming to accept that they are not as
erudite as he thought.

He is a chap who has been sold a pup but now wants us to all to assent
to his delusion that he is the owner of a bull-mastiff.

The full thread is here:

http://groups.msn.com/GrailSeekers/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=423&LastModified=4675502689465981308
Post by s***@yahoo.co.uk
The date of 1916 may have been chosen because some of Crowley's
movements in the US in that period are not recorded, whereas his 1918
involvements in the US are better chronicled. Therefore it could be
argued that he initiated d'Ossa in 1916 without anyone being able to
definitively prove that it was untrue.
s***@yahoo.co.uk
2005-12-13 09:34:45 UTC
Permalink
Dear oh dear.

I am telling you that A Croweey is forged, dummy.

I suppose it is somewhat easier to indulge in semantics than to do
actual research. I believe you to be on the West Coast of the United
States. Foix-Carmain lives there too, and the Augustan Society is near
Los Angeles.

Your choices are to indulge in Usenet semantics or to get off that
large derriere and do some real research.

I commend the second course to you.

A bientot.
Actually, I would like to keep an open mind, either way. May I say,
however, that the information you have presented is hardly convincing,
and seems to me very possibly to be akin to the sort of defamatory
tripe that arcane groups utilize to attack other similar groups in
forums such as alt.magick from time to time.
Also significant is the following circumstance. You have been
challenged to point to a single document in the Legenda which you know
to be forged. However, following this challenge, you have been unable
to do so. The conclusion is that you like to say that there is a
forgery somewhere in that book; in actuality, though, you don't know of
one. Oh well - - - another defamation troll goes down in flames.
Also significant is the following circumstance. In your posts you have
identified the "A. Croweey" categorically as "Aleister Crowley."
However, when one reads the biographical detals of "A. Croweey" in the
Legenda, there are NO POINTS of identity of detail with the life of
Crowley. This leads me to think that even as a defamation troll, you
don't know what you are talking about.
All that being said, I don't care one way or another why you wish to
fabricate dafamatory information attacking Roger Caro. Even were your
attacks to have some foundation, though, it wouldn't affect me one way
or another. I am quite prepared to believe that Caro was a fraud. It
is just that you have failed to prove your case, and also I have no
reason to credit the baseless claims of a defamation troll.
Best regards,
SAR
Sar Draconis
2005-12-13 03:51:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.co.uk
LOL.
All I can say is that if you believe in the existence of an 'A
Croweey' who sounds like a mish-mash of Papus and Crowley - a typical
Caro technique - the same mix up occurs with the death of d'Ossa and
Kamala Jnana - then you'll believe anything.
Hi sor_lux73 defamation troll,

Actually, I would like to keep an open mind, either way. May I say,
however, that the information you have presented is hardly convincing,
and seems to me very possibly to be akin to the sort of defamatory
tripe that arcane groups utilize to attack other similar groups in
forums such as alt.magick from time to time.

Also significant is the following circumstance. You have been
challenged to point to a single document in the Legenda which you know
to be forged. However, following this challenge, you have been unable
to do so. The conclusion is that you like to say that there is a
forgery somewhere in that book; in actuality, though, you don't know of
one. Oh well - - - another defamation troll goes down in flames.

Also significant is the following circumstance. In your posts you have
identified the "A. Croweey" categorically as "Aleister Crowley."
However, when one reads the biographical detals of "A. Croweey" in the
Legenda, there are NO POINTS of identity of detail with the life of
Crowley. This leads me to think that even as a defamation troll, you
don't know what you are talking about.

All that being said, I don't care one way or another why you wish to
fabricate dafamatory information attacking Roger Caro. Even were your
attacks to have some foundation, though, it wouldn't affect me one way
or another. I am quite prepared to believe that Caro was a fraud. It
is just that you have failed to prove your case, and also I have no
reason to credit the baseless claims of a defamation troll.

Best regards,
SAR

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...