M. Roch de Coligny au cabinet 'Honoré d'Urfé'
on the Book of Tobit auction
translated from the website
http://www.haute-expertise.com/pages/feuillet_du_Livre_de_Tobie-1439132.html
(via Google Translator and dictionary! If there are glaring errors please let me know. Thank you.)
Since the catalog of the sale of books & manuscripts, 29 May 2009, the firm "Honoré d'Urfé" is requested on all sides [regarding] lot No. 3 (copy of the book of Tobit) and Lot No. 1 (sheet of Saint Jerome) and lots more to come in [future] sales and relating to the region of Corbières (including transaction Bugarach in 1307). Several people have informed us of the possible connections between these documents and the affair of Rennes-le-Château (Aude) and Gisors (Eure), and that these documents can provide a solution or insight into the enigma of the "treasure" of Abbé Bérenger Saunière. In particular, they refer to scrolls that were [said to] have been discovered by Abbé Saunière, which in fact, according to common opinion, may be false documents made in the 1950s.
To avoid the confusion of genres and the confusion of minds, we declare:
"The documents in our sales are obviously genuine. There are no false or misleading copies. The form of Tobit is written and illuminated at Chartres in the twelfth century. The form of St. Jerome is a document written and illuminated in Normandy in the eleventh or twelfth century. The transaction involving Bugarach is written and signed in 1782 by Bernard Siau notary Couiza, which contains a copy of an act of 1307. Authenticity is absolutely guaranteed, and most1 specialists are in agreement. There is no shadow of doubt about that."
In our catalogs, documents are described in their materiality, with the scientific rigor required.
They are offered for sale for themselves, as objects, and not for extrinsic qualities that they have (eg, their utility in the discovery of a treasure! Or a given esoteric interpretation!).
Accordingly, we refuse on principle to accredit any link between these documents and any "mystery" of the kind of Rennes-le-Château or of Gisors.
We exclude strongly any suggestion to that effect.
The summary of a 'page in the sheet of Tobit" is indicative. It (the commentary?) is not in the description of the lot offered for sale and as such does not affect the professional liability of the auction house or the firm. In response to requests - to that end - we declare we do not to know the identity of its author. Our role was simply to summarize and put into form this long commentary written on four pages2. This commentary (and far more recent than the copy of Tobie!) will not be offered for sale, unless there is a last-minute agreement by the seller (and in which case it will be sold separately). Again, we emphasize that we present for sale the strict document in its materiality, unconnected with later interpretations.
Everyone is free to think what they want from then on. But in our profession, we do not confuse our kind of expertise with that of the imagination and the fable. Finally, personally, we do not add to the confusion of minds. The Book of Tobit, for instance, is one of the books that make up the Sacred Scriptures, and as such it should be read & received simply & clearly as any other biblical book written by God with the Church as interpreter. It illuminates not confuses. It was accessible to ordinary people (of their time) and not the so-called intellectuals. This would distort and misrepresent the book of Tobit as to make it an esoteric reading, and pretend that data there competed in major mystifications whose twentieth & twenty-first centuries have misused and abused again3. Unfortunately, this kind of hoax, is easy to sow and finds fertile ground among the great masses who have abandoned the true faith and have abdicated at the same time right reason4.
Roch de Coligny
on 24 May 2009.
Specific answers to questions asked of Mr Coligny.
We were asked many questions. We summarise and respond.
The sheet itself.
I) This paper manuscript is it authentic?
YES. This is a document written and illuminated in the XIIth century. Location: Chartres.
2) Is there in this post corrections sheet?
NO. This copy is clean, notwithstanding the fact that a card (was back?) in the eighteenth century, hiding the text, which since has been discovered that partially.
3) The word REGIS is written on this sheet?
OUI, Yes, twice (2nd column, lines 10 and 35). Can be seen on the reproduction of the catalog.
4) the ASMODEE word is written on this sheet?
YES, in Latin: Asmodeus. . It appears on the back, under the cartonnage eighteenth century. This word is visible by transparency.
5) the word Temple of Jerusalem is written on this sheet?
YES (2nd column, line 19): AD AD HIERLM Templum DNI (Ad Hierosolymam ad templum Domini).
6) the word Rages is written on this sheet?
YES (2nd column, 9th line before the end): IN civitatem Rages. Other texts give RHAGES.
7) the ten talents of silver are mentioned on this page?
YES (2nd column, lines 7 & 8 before the end).
8) REDDA the word is on this sheet?
NO. But it appears in the book of Tobit: "reddasque ei chirografum. ("et tu lui rendras le chirographe"). ( "and it is as you chirographi). "Redda" is a form of the verb "reddere.
9) What is the text on the left side?
First part of the column: It's the end of the book of Esther. Part Two: preface to Saint Jerome in the Book of Tobit.
II) the summary (i.e. the Commentary from the 20th century).
1) who is the author?
I do not know. His knowledge of the Bible indicates a clergyman.
2) When was it written?
According to the writing and the media (paper), it dates from the early twentieth century. This is indicated in all reserves, have not paid much attention to this paper. I see this document and look in detail. I give then a more precise dating, confirming or refuting that I specify. In any event, it is a document which can not exceed the first half of the twentieth century.
3) Has it been valued?
No. My expertise was in the form of Tobit, and not commentary on this, we merely summarize to fit in a catalog page.
4) The words in capital letters or in italics in the catalog, they are in the document?
Yes to the words in capitals. For the words in italics they are underlined in the manuscript. Typography, underlining in a manuscript resulting in italics in a printed text, and vice
versa.
5) What is stated in paragraphs 2 to 6 figure he sold in the form?
NO. This is a result of the Book of Tobit, the sheet with only the beginning.
6) This is faithful to the text of Tobit?
Largely, yes, according to the biblical text. However, there are errors, for xample, "accompanied by Cyon. In fact, CYON is the Greek word meaning DOG: Tobie was accompanied by a dog, and not by "cyon. Other error reading: EX-place called Bethany. In fact, the authorized versions (available on internet) indicate "Ec-Batani.
7) the value of six million gold francs is accurate?
I do not know. In principle, I do not want a professional point of view, into interpretations of the text, I limit myself to the expertise of material things.
8) This will be sold?
At the moment, this is not expected. Both us and the sellers5 do not pay attention to this commentary, the main one being to us the biblical leaflet from the twelfth century.
III) issues.
1) Bugarach franchises in 1307?
This is a copy, made in 1782 by Siau, notary in Couiza, a settlement reached in 1307 between Pierre de Voisins (Vicini), Lord of Bugarach and Albezu (Albeduno), and the inhabitants of Bugarach . Paper copy, signed by the notary, at the request of an inhabitant of a farm, against the lady Hautpoul seigneuresse of Bugarach. This document will be sold late in 2009 or 2010.
I said he is not the original 1307, but the copy of 1782.
2) The trunk of Hautpoul?
Expression ( "the trunk of Hautpoul", "trunk of Hautpoul) by the holders of these documents.
This is likely to be a part of the archives of the family of Hautpoul. This is confirmed by the contents of the documents, citing the family or where she seigniory (Bugarach and other towns in the Aude).
3) Other documents to sell?
From the same source, there will be other documents to be presented in future sales. For example, copy (1782) of "franchises Bugarach" (1307), or a document of 1818 concerning Agly camp.
4) Can we see these documents?
In principle, an auction is public: anyone can read the books or manuscripts, anyone can bid. We therefore manuscripts through the day, the day before the sale at Drouot. In addition, it
is possible to make an appointment with an expert to see the documents one week
before the sale. I will therefore in due time (no earlier than 15 days before the sale) any person wishing to view these documents. Thank you for an appointment (by email) because the records are not kept on our premises but in the trunk of a company.
5) Do you have expertise in manuscripts?
It's my job. I get happy every person who wants an opinion on a document or book. These opinions and estimates are free oral. Although I do not go into issues revolving around Gisors and Rennes-le-Chateau, I am prepared to give notice purely historical and scientific documents that I would (date, authenticity etc.).
You can view the document here: http://www.lafon-svv.com/flash/index.jsp?id=4268&idCp=79&lng=fr
and http://www.lafon-svv.com/flash/index.jsp?id=4268&idCp=79&lng=fr
You can also view a pdf document of the lot here:
and http://www.lafon-svv.com/flash/index.jsp?id=4268&idCp=79&lng=fr
You can also view a pdf document of the lot here:
NOTES
1) Most specialists? Does this mean there are some who dont agree? I'm not pointing this out to be pedantic, but only in the interests of clarity. (However, i am now informed that the translation is awry here - and the sense may mean the most authoritative specialists are in agreement).
2)Does this mean that as part of the sale agreement the Auction House was asked to 'summarize this commentary' as part of the sale of the Book of Tobit sheet? To my mind that really is suspicious. Why would it be important to the seller to make sure the commentary was known about before the sale of the sheet fromTobit could take place? A commentary which quite clearly has nothing to do with the manuscript, only in as much as the Book of Tobit would seem to be the vehicle for drawing attention to the commentary. As for the comment [regarding the author of the commentary] that 'His knowledge of the Bible indicates a clergyman' - it is a bit flimsy. Any one of us could write a commentary about a biblical book but not be a clergyman - whether today or 100 years ago! In fact, even the seller could have written the commentary the day before he decided to sell the medieval sheet of the 'Book of Tobit'!!
3)It's not the biblical script we are querying - but the commentary. Its the observations on what the author of the commentary might have intended when he wrote it, especially in the context of the capitalised text and the Rennes Afair - which involves an Hautpoul faml member and the same M.O. - modus operandi.
4)Far be it from me to comment on the Auction Houses' proselytizing here, as opposed to its scientific methods advoacated under other circumstances.
5)Then why was it important, as part of the sale, to even draw attention to the commentary if the seller was also not interested in it? The seller also wanted to remain strictly anonymous. Why is that? To ward off unwelcome attention and questions?
1) Most specialists? Does this mean there are some who dont agree? I'm not pointing this out to be pedantic, but only in the interests of clarity. (However, i am now informed that the translation is awry here - and the sense may mean the most authoritative specialists are in agreement).
2)Does this mean that as part of the sale agreement the Auction House was asked to 'summarize this commentary' as part of the sale of the Book of Tobit sheet? To my mind that really is suspicious. Why would it be important to the seller to make sure the commentary was known about before the sale of the sheet fromTobit could take place? A commentary which quite clearly has nothing to do with the manuscript, only in as much as the Book of Tobit would seem to be the vehicle for drawing attention to the commentary. As for the comment [regarding the author of the commentary] that 'His knowledge of the Bible indicates a clergyman' - it is a bit flimsy. Any one of us could write a commentary about a biblical book but not be a clergyman - whether today or 100 years ago! In fact, even the seller could have written the commentary the day before he decided to sell the medieval sheet of the 'Book of Tobit'!!
3)It's not the biblical script we are querying - but the commentary. Its the observations on what the author of the commentary might have intended when he wrote it, especially in the context of the capitalised text and the Rennes Afair - which involves an Hautpoul faml member and the same M.O. - modus operandi.
4)Far be it from me to comment on the Auction Houses' proselytizing here, as opposed to its scientific methods advoacated under other circumstances.
5)Then why was it important, as part of the sale, to even draw attention to the commentary if the seller was also not interested in it? The seller also wanted to remain strictly anonymous. Why is that? To ward off unwelcome attention and questions?