PDA

View Full Version : The Fulcanelli Report - Mystery solved ?



Salazius
06-24-2013, 03:01 PM
I copy paste my article :
http://dartigne.blogspot.fr/2013/06/the-fulcanelli-report-last-and-least.html?spref=fb

---------------



http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xAGlDzVs4Ig/UchFiSb01YI/AAAAAAAAIOY/PdlYqRZPcQ4/s320/1306220416543850011316419.jpg

Le Rapport Fulcanelli, par Ad. N.
Edité par l'auteur (mai 2013)
ISBN 987-689-30-2354-9


It is a moment now that all theories about the identity of Fulcanelli are published in several books, all very well documented. But here is something special and new : Le Rapport Fulcanelli...

You can find informations here :
http://ora-et-labora.frenchboard.com/t744-le-rapport-fulcanelli-ad-n

Nelly Foulcat says :

"Voici un document étonnant qui vient d'être publié en mai 2013. Ce n'est pas un livre à proprement parler, ni un livret, ni un cahier. Au format A4 en recto seul, relié par collage avec un dos toilé, protégé par une couverture en plastique, cet opuscule prend l'aspect d'un travail d'étudiant ou d'un rapport d'entreprise, laissant supposer un très faible tirage réalisé modestement au moyen d'un ordinateur et d'une imprimante ordinaire, seule la reliure faisant appel à un service professionnel.

Mais l'étonnement ne vient pas tant de la forme que du fond ! Car si l'aspect de l'ouvrage évoque la simplicité et l'économie (vertus appréciées en ce temps), le contenu, lui, est explosif, puisqu'il expose rien moins que des éléments définitivement indiscutables quant à l'identité formelle de l'alchimiste Fulcanelli, celui-là même qui fit paraître par l'entremise d'Eugène Canseliet "Le Mystère des Cathédrales" (1926) et "Les Demeures Philosophales" (1930).

L'auteur souhaite manifestement rester anonyme, et déclare de plus avoir produit ce rapport succinct pour le compte d'un "collectif scientifique qui ne se nommera pas". Je respecterai donc ce souhait d'anonymat en n'indiquant aucun élément d'identification. De toute manière, c'est le contenu qui importe. En voici le menu qui, en amuse-gueule, nous propose une anodine petite salade niçoise sur laquelle nous ne nous étendrons pas, par sagesse : nous ne serions pas polis.

Par contre, plus appétissant, en guise d'apéritif, l'auteur balaye les "fulcanellisables" inconsistants. En quelques pages lapidaires qui laissent transparaître une connaissance approfondie du dossier, il éjecte de la liste une série de personnages qui furent un temps proposés par d'aucuns comme pouvant être Fulcanelli sans que rien de sérieux n'étaie pareille allégation : J.H. Rosny aîné, Camille Flammarion, Jules Violle, Alphonse Dousson (dit Joubert) et le marquis Hilaire Bernigaud de Chardonnet passent ainsi à la trappe.

En entrée, nous recevons l'examen des indices laissés par Fulcanelli lui-même dans ses ouvrages, et de ceux distillés au compte-gouttes par Eugène Canseliet. En accompagnement, l'auteur nous propose l'analyse d'interventions postérieures, telles celles de Robert Ambelain, Geneviève Dubois, Patrick Rivière ou Johan Dreue, lesquelles proposent d'autres candidats à l'identité de Fulcanelli (Jean-Julien Champagne, Schwaller de Lubicz, Pierre Dujols…) soit comme auteurs, soit co-auteurs à divers degrés des célèbres ouvrages, mais ceci manque de consistance et nous laisse sur notre faim.

Vient alors le plat de résistance, avec l'entrée en scène récente de trois chercheurs dont les blogs sont mis en ligne sur Internet, et qui par la suite éditeront également des ouvrages : Jean Artero ( "Archer"), Walter Grosse ( "Fulgrosse"), et Philippe Buchelot ("Filostène Jr."). Grâce aux éléments historiques imparables déterrés par ces chercheurs, la quête de l'identité de Fulcanelli se resserre désormais exclusivement autour de quatre protagonistes : l'ingénieur Paul Decœur, le libraire Pierre Dujols, l'illustrateur Jean-Julien Champagne, et l'artisan besogneux et érudit Eugène Canseliet. Toutes les preuves convergent désormais pour certifier que ces seuls quatre personnages sont à l'origine des ouvrages signés sous le pseudonyme de Fulcanelli. Tous quatre ont également œuvré en Alchimie à une période de leur vie, bien que Paul Decœur soit le seul à avoir réalisé le Grand-Œuvre.

Alors que l'affaire semble entendue, l'auteur du Rapport Fulcanelli, discret porte-parole d'un groupe d'amoureux de Science soucieux d'anonymat, nous apporte le dessert : le témoignage d'un homme, aujourd'hui presque centenaire, qui non seulement rencontra Pierre Dujols et Eugène Canseliet, mais fut aussi commis et employé chez le libraire qui édita les ouvrages de Fulcanelli, Jean Schemit. A l'appui de son récit, ce témoin produit des contrats remontants à 1922 et des documents comptables (1932) exposant sans équivoque la répartition des revenus de droits d'auteur desdits ouvrages, prouvant la collaboration de P. Decœur et P. Dujols pour la conception et la rédaction, avec la participation de J.-J. Champagne et E. Canseliet en support (illustration, correction, relecture, mise en forme, publication).

Voilà qui devrait désormais couper court à toutes les spéculations hasardeuses dont certains continuent aujourd'hui encore à répandre sur les réseaux de communication. Par le fait même, ce Rapport Fulcanelli devrait réconcilier les partisans de thèses inutilement présentées comme antagonistes."

In short undiscutables elements (accouning documents coming from the editor Jean Schemit) are presented in this small booklet : Fulcanelli was a group of persons ! All four had rights on the books of Fulcanelli.

P. Decœur et P. Dujols for the conception and the writting, with the help of J.-J. Champagne & E. Canseliet in support (illustration, correction, re reading, formatting, publication).

You can buy it here : http://filostene-alchimia.over-blog.com/article-publication-d-un-rapport-fulcanelli-118489296.html


http://editionslapierre.blog.free.fr/public/Paul-Decoeur.IMG_0001.jpg
Paul Decoeur, the only adept of the four.


http://chrysopee.zzl.org/_photos/38.jpg
Pierre Dujols

http://a396.idata.over-blog.com/418x599/0/23/43/31/pr-sence/poissonportraitjulien.champagne.jpg
Jean - Julien Champagne

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4094/4810764855_8f6bafdfe8_m.jpg
Eugène Canseliet


Mystery solved ?

lwowl
06-24-2013, 08:39 PM
Hello Salazius,

I do not think the Fulcanelli mystery is solved until someone discovers what matter he/they were working with. Private forums have been formed to discuss this in the past and concordances were never reached then as now. Heated debates about the very authors you mention raged; friendships were lost.... Still it is the most fertile hunting ground produced by modern alchemists in the last century. That will change this century I hope:)

lwowl

Illen A. Cluf
06-24-2013, 09:01 PM
You can buy it here : http://filostene-alchimia.over-blog.com/article-publication-d-un-rapport-fulcanelli-118489296.html


Hi Salazius, I still don't see where on the page you can purchase it. Do you know what the cost is?

Krisztian
07-24-2013, 08:28 PM
I suppose Riviere's contention that it was Jules Violle is refuted?

You know, this is very intriguing what you posted here Salazius, my hunch has always lead me to contemplate that the identity of Fulcanelli may have been 'a group'. I just never had any type of research or source or 'evidence' to verify that hunch.

It shall remain a mystery though, as perhaps it should be, until maybe one day a family-relative comes forward and verifies it this way or that way. But even then, it's a story upon story upon story.

Thanks for this post.

zoas23
07-24-2013, 11:14 PM
Thank you.
I suspected that Fulcanelli was a "group" and not a single person; I also suspected that Canseliet was part of that group (well, that was kinda easy to guess... since Canseliet himself made public several times his connection with Fulcanelli).

I was, however, often quite confused about the huge cultural differences between Fulcanelli and Canseliet.
Fulcanelli is very close-minded and a traditionalist (a bit like Guenon was, though in an absolutely different way... I know Guenon and Fulcanelli are VERY different... but they both despised modern culture).
Whilst Canseliet was by far more playful and open-minded... and loved modern culture (I can't imagine Fulcanelli hanging around with André Breton, but I can imagine Canseliet doing it... well, he actually did it).

Are you familiar with the poetry of Fernando Pessoa?
He used to invent "characters" (Heteronyms), each one of them had a biography and each one of them had a unique style... and each one of them published books that were very different.
i.e, Pessoa himself was Rosicrucian, very traditionalist, monarchist and nationalist... and leaning towards the right-wing.
"Alberto Caeiro" was atheist, a self-made philosopher with a poor education, very grumpy.
"Álvaro de Campos" was a gay poet very interested in the avant-garde movements and left-winged in politics.
"Ricardo Reis" was a traditionalist... somehow similar in his ideas to Julius Evola.
But, of course, it was always Pessoa writing uder different names and different styles and inventing "authors" that didn't get along with each other, even if he was all of them.

I suspect that "Fulcanelli" was similar to the heteronyms of Pessoa... that the "group" that was Fulcanelli invented a psychology for the character and made him love some cultural expressions and hate some others... but there was a lot of "tongue-in-cheek" humor about it.
This has little to do with the alchemical ideas of Fulcanelli, but mostly with his "psychology" and "style".

Salazius
07-25-2013, 09:01 AM
Hello,

@ Illen :

In order to purchase you have to contact the owner of the blog;

No idea whatsoever of the price ...

@ Zoas :

"Are you familiar with the poetry of Fernando Pessoa?"

Absolutely not :)

But what you present here is very intriguing !


Some people say it is not a solved case, it's maybe not "Fulcanelli" just because they touched the money of the publications. Indeed I agree... but we find clearly a link between the Hypothyposis of Dujols and the green language and ethymology in the Fulcaneli's.
It is possible that Champagne and Decoeur did the 'practical' parts, giving some clear elements about the magnum opus. Champagne also made the drawings, and Canseliet some text correction or proof readings.

Illen A. Cluf
07-27-2013, 02:24 PM
Hello,

@ Illen :

In order to purchase you have to contact the owner of the blog;



Some people say it is not a solved case, it's maybe not "Fulcanelli" just because they touched the money of the publications. Indeed I agree... but we find clearly a link between the Hypothyposis of Dujols and the green language and ethymology in the Fulcaneli's.
It is possible that Champagne and Decoeur did the 'practical' parts, giving some clear elements about the magnum opus. Champagne also made the drawings, and Canseliet some text correction or proof readings.

Thanks, Salazius. I personally don't believe that Fulcanelli is composed of four people. Canseliet was known as a very honest man, and he denied such a possibility and implied that Fulcanelli was a single individual. However, IMO the influence of Pierre Dujols is certain. I believe that Dujols was Fulcanelli's mysterious Master. I still lean towards Fulcanelli being Chardonnet.

Illen A. Cluf
07-27-2013, 02:27 PM
See:
http://www.alchemylab.com/Alchemy%20Journal%20PDFs/AJ%20Vol.7%20No.2.pdf

Illen A. Cluf
07-27-2013, 02:29 PM
Part 2:
http://www.alchemylab.com/AJ7-3.htm