Vatican Necronomicon
piggott
Necronomicon founded in the National Vatica Library. I red it with avidity
and now I'm searching for some information about it. Could someone help me,
I belong some materials but it's not so much.
Thank you
Don D'Ammassa
piggott
story of the book a very important contribute.
I have a copy of this.
Don D'Ammassa <damm...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
39B775C3...@ix.netcom.com...
Ulfheobar
>In 1993 in Italy we saw a pubblication by ATANOR edition, about a copy of
>Necronomicon founded in the National Vatica Library.
So the Vatican has a copy of the Necronomicon. Big deal, they also supposably
have the spear of destiny and the cross of christ (if thats not morbid what
is?). Just because you read something doesn't make it true. And while indeed
the authentic and ancient tome known strictly as the Necronomicon has been
proven in the most logical manner as not being in exisistance at the time that
Lovecraft wrote about it... Well I am sure the Vatican has volumes of old
ritual grimoires and what have you.
>I red it with avidity
Are you saying you had a gander at the Necronomicon which is in the possession
of the Vatican?
>and now I'm searching for some information about it. Could someone help me,
What information do you need?
>I belong some materials but it's not so much.
I don't understand this part. I assume you are not a native speaker of the
saxon bastard tongue. (english)
They will call you destroyers of morality,
but you are only the discoverers of your selves
~Thus Spoke Zarathustra~
Ulfheobar
>Is not an hoax, it is instead a very interesting book that bring to the
>story of the book a very important contribute.
>I have a copy of this.
Please explain more
saphy...@my-deja.com
ulfh...@aol.com (Ulfheobar) wrote:
> piggot wrote:
>
> >Is not an hoax, it is instead a very interesting book that bring to
the
> >story of the book a very important contribute.
> >I have a copy of this.
>
> Please explain more
~agreed, you've caught the intrest of the masses, tell us your tale :)
~saph
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
vonj...@hotmail.com
Don D'Ammassa <damm...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> It was either one of the recent fakes or perhaps the article was a
>hoax.
The latter's not the case. I'm willing to attest to a copy's
existence - Harvard's got one that I saw (and photocopied) a
few years ago. I would be interested in what our Italian
correspondent says about the book's supposed background and
contents, as I'm not fluent in that tongue myself. Hopefully
we can move forward from there.
AUTHOR: Alhazred, Abdul.
TITLE: [Necronomicon. Italian]
Necronomicon : magia nera in un manoscritto della Biblioteca
vaticana / Pietro Pizzari.
PUB. INFO: Roma : Atanor, 1993.
DESCRIPTION: 159 p. : ill. ; 22 cm.
SUBJECTS: *S1 Psellus, Michael. De daemonibus.
*S2 Occultism--Miscellanea.
*S3 Magic, Ancient.
--
Yrs.,
Daniel Harms
http://www.necfiles.com/
Gnome d Plume
****Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think what they have in the
Vatican Library is a book called "The Names of the Dead" (in Latin of
course) that was a ledger of monks and clerics who died in the service
of the Church. The title looks very similar to "The Necronomicon"
which some people say means: "The Book of Dead Names."*****
Gnome d Plume
piggott
called "Enchiridion, Michaelis Pselli de precibus Euchitarum". The Euchiti
were a sect of Syria, an eretic and depravated sect tha caught a big secrecy
for there rituals. This sect was interesting and particulars for the
rituals, we don't know so much about that bat we know tha the eclesiastic
jerarcy was afraid about them. The Vatican Necronomicon was been , for his
autor Teofilatto of Costantinopoli, the real book of a Yemen magus that
during his peregrination encountered a piramid that caught this enourmous
and blasfem rituals. This book after some century went to the euchiti that,
a frnge of them, use it for blasfeme rituals. Teofilatto of costantinopoli,
an euchit, belong a copy of the book from syrian euchit and he utilizzed it
for varius rituals. We don't know how the book came to the vatican but we
think that during the persecution of eretic sect the vatican caught it.
This is a summary of the story if you want more details ask me.
Sorry if my english is not good
Don D'Ammassa
Ulfheobar
>But there is no real book, so how could it not be a hoax? Unless, as
>mentioned, it's one of the recent hoax Necronomicons.
If this guy says he read an authentic Necro than I wanna know about his
experience. Even if some artful hoaxer created a flesh bound book with some
chemical compound on the cover that he touched and absorbed so when he got half
way through the book he had a bad trip because the book was illustrated by HR
Giger and written by Clive Barker but final completion was by the guy who did
the Intro scenes for the movie Seven.
It would be a great story none the less. And if it wasn't an ancient tome
called the Necro. Than I want to know what it was.
Ulfheobar
>The latter's not the case. I'm willing to attest to a copy's
>existence - Harvard's got one that I saw (and photocopied) a
>few years ago.
Really now?
>as I'm not fluent in that tongue myself
Have you tried to use dictionaries for the language to translate it phrase by
phrase? And if so what have you gotten out of it so far?
Ulfheobar
<Lots of interesting things>
No matter that your english is not the greatest. I want more of this
information. Even if it is a hoax, its great stuff. Gimme all the details you
have. please.
Toff Philipppo
Ulfheobar wrote:
> If this guy says he read an authentic Necro than I wanna know about his
> experience. Even if some artful hoaxer created a flesh bound book with some
> chemical compound on the cover that he touched and absorbed so when he got half
> way through the book he had a bad trip because the book was illustrated by HR
> Giger and written by Clive Barker but final completion was by the guy who did
> the Intro scenes for the movie Seven.
>
> It would be a great story none the less. And if it wasn't an ancient tome
> called the Necro. Than I want to know what it was.
I. Bound in Human Flesh
I'm sure there are real books that were bound in human flesh (or bones?) or
written on the same. Probably rare book dealers or archivists would know more,
and perhaps there is even an article in some journal somewhere on the subject.
I vaguely recall something about the autobiography of a freed slave being
privately bound with the skin of a slave (to express the binder's contempt for
abolition, perhaps?), and more vaguely recall it having been in the British
Museum, and still more vaguely recall it having been buried once they realized
what it was. But I am embarrassed to tell that I don't recall if this story was
fiction or non-fiction, or some combination thereof.
"Don't read passages from evil-looking books bound in human flesh, unless you're
absolutely sure you're not resurrecting evil demons. Even then, you might want to
avoid it." - Horror Film Survival Guide
<http://www.qni.com/~nkchigh/film/Horror_Tips.html>.
II. Hallucinogenic
As for chemical compounds on books, I recall reading a newspaper article about
moldy books being hallucinogenic. I don't know what became of that article (it
may have been an AP article adapted from Ellen Warren's below, if not hers), but
did find material on the web, see below, more or less in increasing order of
interest:
"Maybe Reading Really Does Expand Your Mind"
<http://users.lycaeum.org/~thefane/flink5.htm>
"Dead medium: Fungal Hallucinogens in Decaying Archives"
<http://www.well.com/user/jonl/deadmedia/NOTES36-38.txt>
"Sick Books -- Beware The Slithy Toves, Fungus And Cockroaches"
<http://www.buffalo.edu/scripts/newnews/sickbooksb.html>
"Book Fungus Can Get You High" By Ellen Warren Chicago Tribune
<http://www.whatever.net.au/lists/velcro/velcro.9806/0072.html>
The Lancet, Dec 16, 1995 v346 n8990 p1573(2) Sick library syndrome. (fungi and
mold in library books may spread disease)(Commentary) R.J. Hay.
<http://www.toxicmold.org/documents/0178.html>
Toff
Roses
Thanks to Toff for providing such a fascinating topic & related links.
Rose
Ulfheobar
there.
Dan Clore
> Ulfheobar wrote:
This is great stuff:
> II. Hallucinogenic
>
> As for chemical compounds on books, I recall reading a newspaper article about
> moldy books being hallucinogenic. I don't know what became of that article (it
> may have been an AP article adapted from Ellen Warren's below, if not hers), but
> did find material on the web, see below, more or less in increasing order of
> interest:
>
> "Maybe Reading Really Does Expand Your Mind"
> <http://users.lycaeum.org/~thefane/flink5.htm>
>
> "Dead medium: Fungal Hallucinogens in Decaying Archives"
> <http://www.well.com/user/jonl/deadmedia/NOTES36-38.txt>
>
> "Sick Books -- Beware The Slithy Toves, Fungus And Cockroaches"
> <http://www.buffalo.edu/scripts/newnews/sickbooksb.html>
>
> "Book Fungus Can Get You High" By Ellen Warren Chicago Tribune
> <http://www.whatever.net.au/lists/velcro/velcro.9806/0072.html>
>
> The Lancet, Dec 16, 1995 v346 n8990 p1573(2) Sick library syndrome. (fungi and
> mold in library books may spread disease)(Commentary) R.J. Hay.
> <http://www.toxicmold.org/documents/0178.html>
Thanks for the links. This is awesome.
--
---------------------------------------------------
Dan Clore
The Website of Lord We˙rdgliffe:
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/9879/index.html
The Dan Clore Necronomicon Page:
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/9879/necpage.htm
"Tho-ag in Zhi-gyu slept seven Khorlo. Zodmanas
zhiba. All Nyug bosom. Konch-hog not; Thyan-Kam
not; Lha-Chohan not; Tenbrel Chugnyi not;
Dharmakaya ceased; Tgenchang not become; Barnang
and Ssa in Ngovonyidj; alone Tho-og Yinsin in
night of Sun-chan and Yong-grub (Parinishpanna),
&c., &c.,"
-- The Book of Dzyan.
James Russell
>> <http://www.whatever.net.au/lists/velcro/velcro.9806/0072.html>
Crap, almost all of my books are new(ish), clean editions. No wonder I
haven't been having any good hallucinations for some time.
--
James
(Celluloid Dreams 2SER 107.3FM http://www.2ser.com
Monday nights 7-7.30pm AEST)
Remove "spam-be-damned" to reply by email
Toff Philipppo
Toff Philipppo wrote:
> I. Bound in Human Flesh
>
> I'm sure there are real books that were bound in human flesh (or bones?) or
> written on the same. Probably rare book dealers or archivists would know more,
> and perhaps there is even an article in some journal somewhere on the subject.
I found a number of references for the above and a few of those are given below; I
had been stuck on "human flesh," but "human skin" is a better term. For other
references try using the phrase "bound in human skin" in a search engine. I didn't
look for bones or hair, but it seems possible they could have been used somehow as
well.
"Human Skin Books"
<http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/byform/mailing-lists/exlibris/1994/02/msg00115.html>
(this is an example from a thread, actually - see the index for similar posts "Human
bindings," "Books bound in human skin," etc.)
"De Pelle Humana About the human skin by Ed Schilders 90 quotations about books
bound in human skin"
<http://let.kub.nl/mousebit/thanatose/PELLEHUME.html>
"Frau Ilse Koch, General Lucius Clay, and Human-Skin Atrocities By Jamie McCarthy"
<http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Holocaust/skin.html>
It seems that sometimes a book is bound in human skin to honor the specific person
the skin came from (or the skin's owner stipulates it in their will to honor the
person to whom the book is given). In this case, while it is arguably yucky, it
does not have the element of horror (to my mind). Of course, sometimes it is also
done to dishonor the person or their group.
While macabre, it appears to be an interesting, obscure subject (and not an urban
legend!).
Toff
vonj...@hotmail.com
> >The latter's not the case. I'm willing to attest to a copy's
> >existence - Harvard's got one that I saw (and photocopied) a
> >few years ago.
> Really now?
Absolutely. I've got the photocopy out right now.
> >as I'm not fluent in that tongue myself
> Have you tried to use dictionaries for the language to translate it
>phrase by phrase? And if so what have you gotten out of it so
>far?
I haven't done so, largely because if I started, I'd feel obligated
to finish the whole thing, and I don't have time for that. Still,
the sigils don't resemble anything I've seen before. I take that
back - they look as if they were done by a five-year-old with a
marker...
moderan
jg...@spam-be-damned.ans.com.au wrote:
> >> "Book Fungus Can Get You High" By Ellen Warren Chicago Tribune
> >> <http://www.whatever.net.au/lists/velcro/velcro.9806/0072.html>
>
> Crap, almost all of my books are new(ish), clean editions. No wonder I
> haven't been having any good hallucinations for some time.
>
> --
> James
> (Celluloid Dreams 2SER 107.3FM http://www.2ser.com
> Monday nights 7-7.30pm AEST)
>
>
>
Interesting series of articles...and explains the burgeoning popularity
of this item, though the piece itself is electronically created...
http://www.planetmoderan.com/parchment.html
--
Duane Pesice
http://www.planetmoderan.com
"...common human laws and interests and emotions have no validity or
significance in the vast cosmos-at-large."
H. P. Lovecraft
piggott
serching information to compreove what is said in the book. I wrote to the
vatican library and after three months they respond to me that exist in
their archives a book with that file. They say to me that is impossible to
see only beacause I'm non a researcher or a doctor in litterature, so I ask
to a friend of mine to ask if he can consult it. For the other things I know
that this story could be listen as an hoax, I report only what the author of
the book says and what my study about it are discovering. I found that the
peregrination of the Negronomicon during the century is connected with the
presence of eretic movment .
Ulfheobar
>I haven't done so, largely because if I started, I'd feel obligated
>to finish the whole thing, and I don't have time for that. Still,
>the sigils don't resemble anything I've seen before. I take that
>back - they look as if they were done by a five-year-old with a
>marker...
Let me do it than, do you have a scanner? would you copy the thing? Inquiring
minds want to know...
Ulfheobar
>While macabre, it appears to be an interesting, obscure subject (and not an
>urban
>legend!).
Oh damn, I thought I had another phantasmal things to hold onto as a belief. Do
you walk around ruining everyone's delusions?
(:=
Thanks for more great links Toff
Abaddon
Just a quick question, Piggot. Is the book that you are talking about titled
"Necronomicon" or "Negronomicon"? The difference is important. Negronomicon
is the title of a Dee manuscript and so I would not be surprised that the
Vatican has a copy of it. It bears little resemblance to the "Necronomicon"
other than in name. I mention this because it may save you some time and
trouble.
Abaddon.
--
"We live on a placid island of ignorance
in the midst of black seas of infinity,
and it was not meant that we should voyage far. . ."
--H.P. Lovecraft
Ulfheobar
>Negronomicon
>is the title of a Dee manuscript and so I would not be surprised that the
>Vatican has a copy of it. It bears little resemblance to the "Necronomicon"
What indeed is the Negronomicon? Other than sounding like a Book of Dark Names
(Laws, cheeseburgers, what have you).
piggott
for you from italian)
The seven book of the name of dead
called also Necronomicon
compiled in Bisanzio by
Teofilatto or Pissarios
from de manuscript called
Al Azif of the mad Arab
This is what we can read first. I make a mistake in the trascription in the
mail before
Don D'Ammassa
I'm not surprised that it's in the Vatican library, if that's the case, but it
is definitely not the Necronomicon of H.P. Lovecraft.
Ulfheobar
>Then it clearly is a modern fake since there was no Al Azif by the mad Arab.
How do you know for sure... other than Lovecraft saying he made it up, how can
you go about proving some one did not exist? Especially some one who was
suppose to have lived so long ago.
And if there really is an ancient tome called the Necronomicon, even if a mad
arab did not write it, would it still be a hoax than?
Don D'Ammassa
record of it anywhere prior to the 20th century, it is certainly not rational to
assume it exists.
Ulfheobar
>As you certainly know, you cannot prove a negative. However, since there is
>no
>record of it anywhere prior to the 20th century, it is certainly not rational
>to
>assume it exists.
And we all know just how irrational I am and how much I hate rationalizations
even though I participate in doing so too often.
piggott
> As you certainly know, you cannot prove a negative. However, since there
is no
> record of it anywhere prior to the 20th century, it is certainly not
rational to
> assume it exists.
If the copy of the Vatic Library, is true as it seems, it is a prove that is
dated in 900 d.c., so we can start with it to sturdy if is true and after to
see if we can find something before it
Gregory L. Hansen
Or the Vatican library may have acquired a copy of the paperback that was
written in the 1970's.
--
"What are the possibilities of small but movable machines? They may or
may not be useful, but they surely would be fun to make."
-- Richard P. Feynman, 1959
Don D'Ammassa
still a hoax. Why do you persist in wanting to believe in something which is so
demonstrably false? Why not believe in flying saucers, the Men in Black, and
other more plausible hoaxes?
Abaddon
De Negronomicon is a name generally given to a set of Dee's diaries dealing with
the evocation of various Enochian entities. More or less, it is a list of "Black
Names" (hence the name). Most of Dee's works are either cyphers, impenetrable or
just plain confusing. Such is the case here. The closest relavant MS would be
"A True and Faithful Revelation of What Occured . . . etc", where the basis of
Enochian magic is revealed (more or less, though it is very confusing). A number
of Necronomicon true believes often site Dee's Negronomicon as the Nec., but
really it is just a bunch of disjointed diary notes thrown together by previous
owners of Dee's originals.
Don D'Ammassa
be some other book with the same or a similar name that dates from the 9th
century, but you'll have to provide some evidence before we can accept even
that as an established fact, particularly since you indicated in one of your
earlier messages that it was published in 1993, not 900. Remember, if it's a
1993 "reprint" of a book from 900, it's likely to be a lie.
piggott wrote:
> You don't understando, the copy belonged by the Vatican Library was wrote in
> 900 and is a greek copy of a book that in the same book was called
> NECRONOMICON.
> You understand Now or I must explain me more
>
> Piggott
Abaddon
> You don't understando, the copy belonged by the Vatican Library was wrote in
> 900 and is a greek copy of a book that in the same book was called
> NECRONOMICON.
> You understand Now or I must explain me more
>
> Piggott
You must understand our reluctance to accept this book as the real
"necronomicon". A great many things must go into verifying such a claim.
Analysis of the text is not enough. Other factors must be considered: analysis
of paper, diction, language, and intertextual sources found within the text,
etc. None of these things are verifiable without direct investigation of the
work in question by experts in the field. A mere translation of the text
itself will reveal much, but to verify the authenticity of the work requires
experts in the field of bibliography, carbon dating and occult sciences not to
mention archaic languages. While it is possible that the text that you mention
is old, this does not in itself mean that it is not a forgery. Without seeing
the text itself, no one on this news group can really accept what you say.
Even if somehow one of us could see the actual manuscript itself, none of us (I
assume) is an expert in ancient texts, paper, languages etc. Unless you can
supply verification of these sorts of evidence, we must assume that it is a
hoax. I myself have some experience in bibliography and I can assure you that
it is very very difficult to authenticate any pre-1900 text as original without
years of study in the field. Do not take this to mean that we think you are
lying, or are a fool. We are saying nothing of the sort. We are merely saying
that the chances of this work being authentic are small. If you can provide
the nescessary information (paper type, watermarks, diction, language etc) we
would be more willing to accept your claims.
piggott
> No, if it's a 1993 publication that claims to have been written in 900,
it's
> still a hoax. Why do you persist in wanting to believe in something which
is so
> demonstrably false? Why not believe in flying saucers, the Men in Black,
and
> other more plausible hoaxes?
I don't persist in nothing, you persinst in your point of view without hte
book withouth read it, without see it.
I belong something in my hand, you don't have nothing and you want to
judgeing. Wow.
Why if it's wrote in 900 must be an hoax, exist this ancient and dated book,
and you still say that's an hoax. I can believe more in something if I
belong something of real. Do you read greek? I read greek and I traduced
some page from the book and in that first page is clear the author and the
book. You have preconception about the book and so you say that everything
is an hoax.
It's not a good point of study and view.
Piggott
Don D'Ammassa
"hoaxes".
piggott
vonj...@hotmail.com
"piggott" <cu...@ecn.org> wrote:
> I don't persist in nothing, you persinst in your point of view without
>hte book withouth read it, without see it.
At this point, though, neither you nor Don have seen the book.
Given the evidence on both sides, I'd have to side with Don,
just because we've never seen any Necronomicon (or even a
mention of the Necronomicon) that dates before 1920. Still,
I think it's worth looking into.
What we really need is someone who can access the Vatican
archives to view the book and report on its contents. Or,
barring that, someone who can access Harvard or the University
of Cincinnati collections...
--
Yrs.,
Daniel Harms
http://www.necfiles.com/
piggott
the Vatican Library and found the Necronomicon off 900. We repubblished this
book after the traduction from the greek. When Pizzarro found the book he
understand that it wasn't opened since some century and so he started the
traduction. I'll find some evidence to bring all of you
Don D'Ammassa <damm...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
39BFFD21...@ix.netcom.com...
> Well, we know it can't be the book described in Lovecraft's stories. It
could
> be some other book with the same or a similar name that dates from the 9th
> century, but you'll have to provide some evidence before we can accept
even
> that as an established fact, particularly since you indicated in one of
your
> earlier messages that it was published in 1993, not 900. Remember, if
it's a
Don D'Ammassa
other book with the same or similar title.
piggott wrote:
> The 1993 pubblicatio was made by Pizzarro, italian researcher that went to
> the Vatican Library and found the Necronomicon off 900. We repubblished this
> book after the traduction from the greek. When Pizzarro found the book he
> understand that it wasn't opened since some century and so he started the
> traduction. I'll find some evidence to bring all of you
>
> Don D'Ammassa <damm...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> 39BFFD21...@ix.netcom.com...
> > Well, we know it can't be the book described in Lovecraft's stories. It
> could
> > be some other book with the same or a similar name that dates from the 9th
> > century, but you'll have to provide some evidence before we can accept
> even
> > that as an established fact, particularly since you indicated in one of
> your
> > earlier messages that it was published in 1993, not 900. Remember, if
> it's a
piggott
have prove (the card of Vatican Library) that this book exist, so continue
to judge. You don't have a critic mind because with prejudice you judge what
you don't have.
Ulfheobar
>You continue to judge without nothing under your hands, I have a copy and I
>have prove (the card of Vatican Library) that this book exist, so continue
>to judge. You don't have a critic mind because with prejudice you judge what
>you don't have.
Okay. So let's look at things as they are. First I need everyone to seperate
themselves from their emotions and convictions.
We have a book.
This book was published fairly recently right?
right.
The book is suppose to be an interpation of a really old book right?
right.
So to prove the validity of the modern book we must have the older book or some
other evidence that it exists right?
right.
Without the older book or some other evidence we cannot prove the validity of
the new book. Simple as that. For all intents and purposes a solid arguement
still stands. There has been no book or other evidence of a Necronomicon before
Lovecraft wrote about the thing.
I can write a book, and say I had an older manuscript, but this does not mean I
had an older manuscript. This only means I said I did. This is a common enough
occurance in the occult field. Most of the large occult groups lay claim to
ancient ties which have either been disproven or they cannot come up with any
evidence of their claims.
So indeed a book physically exists, now as to if that book is truely based on
an older text that existed is the root of the question. I for one think not,
otherwise that book it was based on could be produced. Otherwise how did some
one make a fairly recent version of the thing?
And just because a card in a library exists does not mean the book exists...
There have been enough hoaxes about the Necronomicon in american libraries and
in at least one mail order cataloge.
With the information on Dan Clore's Necronomicon page you could follow what are
the flaws in the logic of believing in the Necronomicon to produce a better
questioable hoax... or book if your intents are above money making. Of course
such a book would not be easy to create.
But as been said, people pop up and say hey I got a necronomicon and it turns
out no one ever has a tome or other evidence that predates Lovecraft's
existence. Thats just the way it works. Not that I disbelieve it could happen,
but that it has not happened yet, and from the evidence I have seen I believe
it to be a forgery for the simple facts involved. Though I would still love a
translation just to see if its any better written than the ones so far
produced.
Robert Vincent Walker-Smith
<much snippage>
>But as been said, people pop up and say hey I got a necronomicon and it turns
>out no one ever has a tome or other evidence that predates Lovecraft's
>existence. Thats just the way it works. Not that I disbelieve it could
>happen,
>but that it has not happened yet, and from the evidence I have seen I believe
>it to be a forgery for the simple facts involved. Though I would still love a
>translation just to see if its any better written than the ones so far
>produced.
evidence.
Robert
"You're maudlin and full of self-pity - you're magnificent."
Addison DeWitt, in "All About Eve"
saphy...@my-deja.com
Whoo hoo! Go Ulf! I whole heartedly agree! evidence of the book that
was used to create the new book must be produced for belief to happen,
otherwise, point and match is going to Ulf here :)
Your ball piggott. :)
~saph
Ulfheobar
>I heartily and enthusiastically concur. I eager await 'piggott's additional
>evidence.
>
Hey your not suppose to agree with me... that means I am being agreable and
thats just not in character... what is the world coming to? Is R'lyeh rising
from the depths?
Ulfheobar
>Whoo hoo! Go Ulf! I whole heartedly agree! evidence of the book that
>was used to create the new book must be produced for belief to happen,
>otherwise, point and match is going to Ulf here :)
>
>Your ball piggott. :)
Heh.. are we starting the Miskatonic Cephlapods team here?
Don D'Ammassa
We know that Lovecraft made the book up.
You say that there is a book with the same name in the Vatican.
It might be a modern fake that CLAIMS to be from 900.
It might be a book with a similar name from 900.
It is NOT the book Lovecraft wrote about.
You have not given us any evidence.
The fact that the book is not the one Lovecraft spoke of in his fiction is fact,
not a judgment.
I agree that the Vatican probably has a book of that name in its list. That is
not a judgment. I'm accepting your statement at face value.
You have yet to give any real evidence of your claim. That is not a judgment.
It is a fact.
piggott wrote:
> You continue to judge without nothing under your hands, I have a copy and I
> have prove (the card of Vatican Library) that this book exist, so continue
> to judge. You don't have a critic mind because with prejudice you judge what
> you don't have.
>
digital serpent
news:8ppumk$6ke$1...@serv1.albacom.net...
> The 1993 pubblicatio was made by Pizzarro, italian researcher that went to
> the Vatican Library and found the Necronomicon off 900. We repubblished
this
> book after the traduction from the greek. When Pizzarro found the book he
> understand that it wasn't opened since some century and so he started the
> traduction. I'll find some evidence to bring all of you
>
>
I'm sure for most of you I'm a newcomer... but at least one of you has seen
me before...
in regards to the vatican necronomicon I'm doing yet another search of the
vatican library catalogue (yes it's available online for searching) which is
upposed to list all the books available to the public which are contained in
the vatican library.
no results matched an author named pizzarro... pizarro yes... but those are
books regarding politics or rio de janeiro...
you may also like to know that the catlogue contains no results with
anything matching necronomicon or any of various spellings...
odd though.. it seems my connection to the catalogue has just been
dropped... a sign perhaps? yes a sign... a sign that my ISP sucks...
--
Gray
Don D'Ammassa
not surprised?
Robert Vincent Walker-Smith
<snip>
>Heh.. are we starting the Miskatonic Cephlapods team here?
No, the Innsmouth Community College "Fighting Sea Devils".
Ulfheobar
>No, the Innsmouth Community College "Fighting Sea Devils".
Heh heh heh... even better
Mook23
the vatican sent back to you, even if it is in italian.
piggott wrote in message <8pihb2$20a$1...@serv1.albacom.net>...
>The name of the book is "NECRONOMICON", and the intestaion is : (I traslate
>for you from italian)
>
> The seven book of the name of dead
>called also Necronomicon
>compiled in Bisanzio by
>Teofilatto or Pissarios
>from de manuscript called
>Al Azif of the mad Arab
>
>This is what we can read first. I make a mistake in the trascription in the
>mail before
>
>
Mook23
fact,
>not a judgment.
>
>I agree that the Vatican probably has a book of that name in its list.
That is
>not a judgment. I'm accepting your statement at face value.
>
>You have yet to give any real evidence of your claim. That is not a
judgment.
>It is a fact.
>
O.K., I'm a new guy in this group so don't think I'm pretentious, but how
can you say what is fact and what is fiction? We all know that it is
technically impossible to prove a negative (except in mathematics; ie:
Fermat's Last Therom...). The only thing you can say with any degree of
accuracy is that there is no evidence to support the existance of the
Necronomicon as it was described by Lovecraft. However, (and I know this is
a bad example), there are people who believe that the holocaust never
happened either, despite the proof (which to you and me is generally
photographic, unless you were there, and second hand). Lovecraft claims to
have made up the necronomicon. While this may be true, it is also possible
that he was lying. In some of my other posts, I mentioned the book "Holy
Blood, Holy Grail" (or at least the mysteries that it deals with). It is
possible that the Templars got a hold of the necronomicon or something like
it during the crusades. The time lines are pretty well matched and all the
characters seem to fit as well. If the Vatican has a copy of a 10th century
text called the necronomicon in it's research collection (not its public
collection as someone earlier suggested...) it very well could be the work
of the mad ahrab. The Vatican probably has the largest and most off-limits
collection of ancient texts in the world, including several un-published
gospels from the first century onward. It's also possible that Lovecraft's
references to the book are actually anagrams designed to hide the true
source of the writings (a GREEK trick from the early days...). So let's all
stick to the scientific method here and not put people down for having a
fresh point of view.
Don D'Ammassa
doesn't. By your definition, nothing could ever be described as factual, which
reduces the word to nonsense.
saphy...@my-deja.com
I know where you are comming from, and to defend myself and others
here, we try to be open minded, but if he says he has proof, he should
show it. It is not that we won't give a chance, but comming to a
message board, saying you have proof that a book as contraversial at
this, and previously believed to be fictional does indeed exist, and
then refusing to back the statement is really just not nice... my
mother told me everybody hates a tease :) so basically, we love you
piggot, just back yourself up.
~Saph
Ulfheobar
>O.K., I'm a new guy in this group so don't think I'm pretentious, but how
>can you say what is fact and what is fiction?
I wonder at the terms myself, but when it comes down to the book, if you have a
source that predates the first hoax or lovecrafts invention that it could be
fact, if it comes later, well there are about a dozen or so hoaxes out there so
you go with what is and what isn't.
>We all know that it is
>technically impossible to prove a negative
Who is the we you refer to?
>The only thing you can say with any degree of
>accuracy is that there is no evidence to support the existance of the
>Necronomicon as it was described by Lovecraft.
Which in the context of this newsgroup I think has become to be the deciding
factor of it all.
>Lovecraft claims to
>have made up the necronomicon. While this may be true, it is also possible
>that he was lying.
I have heard this one before...
>If the Vatican has a copy of a 10th century
>text called the necronomicon in it's research collection (not its public
>collection as someone earlier suggested...) it very well could be the work
>of the mad ahrab.
Yeah, but lovecraft fudging on the name of the book, and the name of the arab
to me further the idea that lovecraft invented it.
There are plenty o books from back when that are similair in that the books are
for binding or summoning demons and other less wholesome entities.
I am also of the mind that lovecraft despite his waking contempt for the occult
was getting info through his dreams... but then as has been said I am a nut or
some other small digestable product.
> The Vatican probably has the largest and most off-limits
>collection of ancient texts in the world, including several un-published
>gospels from the first century onward.
How do you know?
>It's also possible that Lovecraft's
>references to the book are actually anagrams designed to hide the true
>source of the writings
It just doesn't fit his character in that method. In his letters (the man wrote
about 200 pounds of letters a year it seems) he talks at length about the
sources, and the book, about the mythos, about his view on the occult. Its just
in character for him, while the possibility is there... well, it up to someone
else to decide what they wanna think.
>So let's all
>stick to the scientific method here and not put people down for having a
>fresh point of view.
Its nothing really fresh, drop in and out of here every couple of years and
you'll see. Someone says hey I got a book, some one else says, photocopy it,
the original poster disappears or the book they were talking about is a hoax...
Mook23
>>If the Vatican has a copy of a 10th century
>>text called the necronomicon in it's research collection (not its public
>>collection as someone earlier suggested...) it very well could be the work
>>of the mad ahrab.
>
arab
>to me further the idea that lovecraft invented it.
>
been intentional and part of a code. The fairly plain codes that relate to
the Priority of Sion mystery are fasioned in this way.
>I am also of the mind that lovecraft despite his waking contempt for the
occult
>was getting info through his dreams... but then as has been said I am a nut
or
>some other small digestable product.
I agree with you on this one. A lot of other artists claim dream
inspiration as well. Paganinni claimed that the devil played for him in his
dreams. Clive Barker is a noted dream writer as well.
>> The Vatican probably has the largest and most off-limits
>>collection of ancient texts in the world, including several un-published
>>gospels from the first century onward.
>
>How do you know?
This is actuall fact, inquire about their research collection sometime.
>
Ulfheobar
>One of the points I was trying to make here was that the mistakes could have
>been intentional and part of a code.
Could have, but for all intents and purposes because of lovecrafts waking
world, he did not believe in the occult and in a letter jested about crowley.
He tells in depth about how he came to the name, and how he came to the name of
the arab who wrote the book. His fictional history of the book could have been
written better had the man studied the occult at any length just for the
information he could have used.
>The fairly plain codes that relate to
>the Priority of Sion mystery are fasioned in this way.
Oh indeed codes have been used and abused... A good point really, but it just
doesn't seem plausible that Lovecraft used a code for something he admited to
inventing.
>I agree with you on this one. A lot of other artists claim dream
>inspiration as well. Paganinni claimed that the devil played for him in his
>dreams. Clive Barker is a noted dream writer as well.
Yes! a like in mind if only in this one aspect. The dreams have to come from
somewhere. There are quite a few authors who have had dreams for their
inspiration, one need not look past the creator of Nightmare on Elm Street,
though Clive Barker is far far better in my opinion.
Do you have inspiring or strange dreams?
I have and some one in email admited to having one similair to one I had. Every
couple of night if I do or don't read anything mythos or magick related I have
been having the dreams for about the past month... about one to twice a week.
Usually pretty complicated dreams that upon awakening I cannot write down the
whole as I have forgotten so much already. The dreams usually have the feeling
of a lucid dream but I feel like I am drugged in the dream, I can chose my
action but the action is slowed and my mind numbed.
>This is actuall fact, inquire about their research collection sometime.
I was wondering if you were some one special enough to be able to have a gander
at these books... I mean everyone knows the Vatican has all the great hidden
books and what not, but I have never met anyone who has been able to delve in
their super secret private library.