Here's a topic I haven't seen addressed yet on this forum: the 12 images appear to be organized in pairs by layout and design. But is it just a stylistic quirk or is it a part of the puzzle that we need to solve? To give you an idea of what I'm talking about, look at the two images that are most obviously paired, Image 1 and Image 12. Both have that distinctive narrow shape, like a cathedral window with a curved arch at the top. But there's more to it than that. For example, start with Image 12: If you draw a line from that "Eye of Ra" thing in the water up through the eye of the griffin, you get a straight, vertical line that passes through both the jewel of the picture and the middle of the woman's face: Now superimpose that same image over Image 1 and - voila! - with no shifting at all, that same line also goes through the Image 1 jewel and through the middle of the Image 1 face: Creepy, eh? "Yeah, yeah..." I hear some of you saying, "but Photoshop didn't exist back in 1982!" And that's true, but you could do the same thing with tracing paper or just by folding the pages. And note that this isn't just the line through the middle of the picture. It's a specific, off-center line. Still not convinced? Okay, try this: Draw a line from each hand in Image 12 and go through the jewel. When you superimpose that over Image 1, the same lines go through the hands in Image 1. You can do these same sorts of tricks with other pairs of images in the book, but you can't do it just by randomly matching any two images. It only works when each image is paired with its specific partner. (And if anyone thinks that this is all just a coincidence, please contact me right away so we can discuss your purchase of a prominent bridge in the Brooklyn area.) But the question is, what does it mean? Is this just a standard layout trick that artists use when they want a set of pictures to have a consistent appearance? Or is there more to it than that? I'd be interested to hear what other people think.

I've looked at this as well, and the associations are really fun. It works too when you mirror one half of an image and overlay it on the other (e.g., tear out a picture, fold it hotdog style in one direction or another, hold up to the light... or photoshop it). The picture on the back of a picture can be held and viewed through the light as well to create some awesome associations (e.g., light areas of an image outline the clues in the dark areas on the image behind; dark areas of an image outline the clues in the light areas on the image behind). Once I found like a hundred zillion cools ways of making "associations," I gave up - realizing they were there because I am good at finding patterns. Maybe they were intentional, but I seemed to be spending more time on finding cool new associations than I was on "wedding one picture / With one verse" as the directions stated. My theories seemed to be confusingly expanding when I concentrated on more than one image, yet helpfully contracting when I honed in on one. Do I think there could be something there? Sure. Did BP intend it in any one of the cases described? Maybe. We find many ways in which the clues, in both images and verses, seem to allude to a clue or place in another puzzle. Tangentially, every single one of these seems to be related. And the directions do also state, "A dozen paintings / Share the clues / Yet Fairy secrets / Come in twos." Maybe this means that the clues for each puzzle are scattered amongst all the images, but the key to narrowing down and solving a puzzle can only be found by focusing on a single image and verse pair. wk is also taking a crack at a relational theory right now looking at the moon sizes and orbits in order to determine the pairings. I'm not sure how it will pan out, but I'm inclined to think it will be unnecessary regardless (no disrespect wk! it's good work!).

In the above - if not coincidence, then, I think, relationships arising artistically out of JP's approach, but not relevant to the puzzle, or probably even deliberate. It's not outlandish to position a jewel at the centre of a figure, whose face and hands are naturally symmetrical, and place the composition slightly off-centre.

WhiteRabbit wrote:: In the above - if not coincidence, then, I think, relationships arising artistically out of JP's approach, but not relevant to the puzzle, or probably even deliberate. It's not outlandish to position a jewel at the centre of a figure, whose face and hands are naturally symmetrical, and place the composition slightly off-centre. Ah... But the point here is not that the face, jewel, Eye of Ra, and eye of griffin are all in one line in one picture. The point is that they are on exactly the same line as the face and jewel of the matching picture. Let's take a look at the math. Assume that, for no particular reason, the artist made images 1 and 12 the same shape and size. And assume that, again, for no particular reason, he decided to put the jewels and faces in vertical lines in those two (because they're not that way in all the pictures). My scans of Image 1 and Image 12 are 895 pixels wide (not including margins or white space). The red line I drew is 5 pixels wide. That means, if you divided each image up into strips of 5 pixels, the odds are 1 in 179 that the face/jewel pair in the second picture would be on the same line as in the first. Play around with some of the images that aren't pairs and you'll see that those coincidences just don't happen. I think it's fairly clear that we are supposed to pair an image with a verse AND we are supposed to pair an image with an image. (And it wouldn't surprise me if we are also supposed to pair a verse with a verse.)

Oregonian wrote:: I think it's fairly clear that we are supposed to pair an image with a verse AND we are supposed to pair an image with an image. (And it wouldn't surprise me if we are also supposed to pair a verse with a verse.) Yes, but even this were true, it's clearly NOT necessary. Neither Cleveland nor Chicago utilized this method - the ONLY solved puzzles. Don't get me wrong, the connections are awesome. But I choose not to waste my time trying to figure out the irrelevant clues.

Here's another pair of images for you. Image 3 goes with Image 11. Notice how perfectly those arms span the circle. In fact, let's zoom in more closely to see just how perfect it is. Remember your high school geometry? Two straight lines intersect in a point, but a straight line that is tangent to a circle also creates an intersection of a single point. Mr. Suit-of-Armor is dangling the watch to create a straight line and he's clearly holding it to create a tangent. If he were even 5 pixels to either side, it wouldn't be a perfect match. But it IS a perfect match. And let me stress this point: I am not moving these images around to line up the contents. This is just a direct overlay of one picture onto another. I am only lining up the edges. The message here seems pretty clear to me: To find the precise spots where the casques are buried, we need to find geometric intersections - either tangents to curves or the intersections of straight lines.

Oregonian wrote:: Remember your high school geometry? ... And let me stress this point: I am not moving these images around to line up the contents. This is just a direct overlay of one picture onto another. I am only lining up the edges. The message here seems pretty clear to me: To find the precise spots where the casques are buried, we need to find geometric intersections - either tangents to curves or the intersections of straight lines. I make state math exams, among others. I work in psychometrics. Yes, I understand geometry and mathematical/spacial relation. And we don't NEED to do anything with geometric intersections. If we did, not a single casque would have been found.

Just because we didn't need something for the two solved casques, of course, doesn't mean it's not useful for the others...

Hirudiniforme wrote:: And we don't NEED to do anything with geometric intersections. If we did, not a single casque would have been found. So ignore this discussion! For heaven's sake, why are you even here? If the topic doesn't interest you, go to a different thread. This one is for talking about the overlays of the pictures.

WhiteRabbit wrote:: Just because we didn't need something for the two solved casques, of course, doesn't mean it's not useful for the others... Agreed completely. I've also agreed that the matching might be intended. However, over four decades many many things have been tried by many different-thinking people. Imagine the mind power on the puzzles when they were first released. Only a few things have passed the test of time... the coordinates, the iconic image, etc. If we just rule everything in because it may be useful to a single solve, we will go bonkers. Stating that a new over-arching theory on the solving technique is NEEDED is ridiculous, especially because two have been found that do not utilize the theory have been found. Finding a new over-arching theory that applies to the solved casques as well (something like wk's) is much more plausible. Finding a theory that applies to several pictures (not all) and is needed to solve only a few of the locations (neither Chicago nor Cleveland) is not that plausible. Though, I'm not saying it's not possible.

Oregonian wrote:: So ignore this discussion! For heaven's sake, why are you even here? If the topic doesn't interest you, go to a different thread. This one is for talking about the overlays of the pictures. Buddy, you asked directly for people's thoughts. I am talking specifically on the topic of the overlays. The topic obviously interests me as I have spent a lot of time on exactly what you are doing. What's the problem? Don't be so butthurt that I don't completely agree with your idea. You likely don't/won't agree with all mine, but I won't go all menstrual on you.

WhiteRabbit wrote:: Just because we didn't need something for the two solved casques, of course, doesn't mean it's not useful for the others... Why don't we test the theory with Chicago or Cleveland...find the match and see if anything would have helped in those instances...that's the scientific way to go about it right?

decibalnyc wrote:: Why don't we test the theory with Chicago or Cleveland...find the match and see if anything would have helped in those instances...that's the scientific way to go about it right? Sure, but what WR is saying is that there may be a method to solve additional puzzles that wasn't utilized in the two casques that were found.

I find the art has excellent composition. I think it was deliberate according to JJP's talent as an artist. I find it unlikely but not impossible for BP to to put some kind of geometric helper in a puzzle, but it's going to have that overall balance no matter what. Take a look at other works by JJP and I expect you'll see nice lines and more of his excellent technique.

i think maybe the overlay your seeing, has to do with the printing process and the registration marks hxxp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printmaking#Registration

Hirudiniforme wrote:: Sure, but what WR is saying is that there may be a method to solve additional puzzles that wasn't utilized in the two casques that were found. Possibly, but the reality is applying the theories found in chicago and Cleveland have advanced the search, Diverging from them has yielded interesting discussion but no actual results ever.

Oregonian, what is the matching Image to Cleveland or to Chicago, in your opinion? It's been 30 years that we've been ruminating over these clues, either privately or through this bulletin board, so I am open to hear this theory more, just like any theory.

I was noodling around with this last night and I would like to post some results. Nothing as complex as what Oregonian has found, but something that others might find interesting, and/or useful. Would someone be so kind as to explain how I would post a modified image that presently resides on my hard drive (I'm using Paint if that makes a difference)? Thanks in advance.

Erpobdelliforme wrote:: Would someone be so kind as to explain how I would post a modified image that presently resides on my hard drive (I'm using Paint if that makes a difference)? The easiest way is to set up a free Flickr account. I believe at this point they're giving a free terrabyte of storage (which is a lot). Upload your images there and then click on the "share this photo" button, which gives you a choice of sizes and supplies the HTML code. Then you can insert your image here while it's posted over there. That's what I've done with all the images in this thread. I'm looking forward to seeing what you've found!

Egbert wrote:: Oregonian, what is the matching Image to Cleveland or to Chicago, in your opinion? Hi Egbert, The most likely image to pair with Cleveland (#4) is the other one that features a human form on a horse (#6). Check it out: A horse on a stone pedestal... A downcast gaze... Fountains (of youth or otherwise)... And note how nicely the two noses overlap at the same point. Odd though it sounds, noses seem to be endpoints for lines in several pictures (as in the 1/12 mashup). The other body parts that were crucial in the 1/12 combo were hands. So, the most likely image to pair with Chicago (#5) would be the only other image that doesn't have visible hands, our whirling dervish #8: As you can see, there are several very interesting alignments created here. But - obligatory disclaimer - people who are not interested in this line of exploration should just move on to one of the other threads. I'm interested in thoughts here, not in reflexive refusals to think. PS: Are you still in Florida, Egbert? We should meet up sometime. (Despite the name, I'm not in Oregon right now.)

So Oregonian got me to thinking that maybe there are other aspects to the puzzle as a whole that we haven't explored, so I explored one. Everything that follows could just be a coincidence, and I'll leave it to anyone who reads this to draw their own conclusions, and use the information as they see fit. I started with the following observations: 1) All twelve images have a left hand in them. In six of them (1,3,7,9,11,12), the left hand figures prominently in the image, while in the other six, the left hand is implied by the location of the left arm. 2) With the exception of image 7 (the one we are assuming pairs with New Orleans), all of the images have a jewel in them as well, the placement of which has always seemed kind of sloppy to me. 3) I haven't done a thorough analysis, but there does not seem to be any other feature that all twelve images have in common, beyond variations of basic geometric shapes. So what if in an homage to Masquerade , the left hand and the jewel relate to each other in some way? Let's test the theory with Image 5 (Chicago): Hmm, interesting that the only thing you can see from the treasure ground falls along the line (yellow rectangle). Could just be a coincidence though, so how about Image 4 (Cleveland): In this case, not just an site confirmer, but the actual corner where the casque was found. Two for two but anything is possible with small sample sizes. How about Image 10 (Milwaukee): If you believe like I do that we should be looking at the base of a tall tree with a distinguishing mark on it (again, yellow rectangle), then this image fits the pattern as well. What does it all mean? Maybe nothing. Or maybe it means that whomever is digging in Florida should make sure that they are within sight of something that looks something like this (yellow rectangle): Possibly more, and possibly much less. But endlessly fascinating all the same.

Nice work, Renovator! I've got a couple of follow-ups to what you posted. First, Image 7 DOES have a jewel in it. The jewel is turquoise and it's up in the clock face. And - surprise, surprise - guess what happens when you draw a line through the hand and nose? (By the way, several of the hands in these images are fairly large, which creates a lot of possibilities for the hand/line intersection. I've found that the crucial place to anchor the lines is the middle of each wrist. You'll see that the vertical line in the 1/12 mashup goes through Ms. San Francisco's wrists. I hate the crucifixion imagery that goes with that setup, but nonetheless it works.) Second follow-up: In your Milwaukee illustration, I think you may have been biased by wanting your line to end up at that mark on the cape. You might try it again just following the rules about wrists and noses....

Unknown: The jewel is turquoise and it's up in the clock face Unknown: I've found that the crucial place to anchor the lines is the middle of each wrist Unknown: You might try it again just following the rules about wrists and noses.... Of course. I see it now. Thanks for pointing that out. So, twelve jewels, all accounted for. The only thing all twelve images have in common (well, not exactly: see below). Interestingly, over half fall pretty much on the Y Axis of the image (if we divide the image into quadrants), with half of the rest pretty close to it. Not attaching any significance to this though. I was using the index finger, which I'll admit the location of which has to be assumed in many of the images. Since I think the thickness of the jewels is a bigger obstacle to precision, and since I think that it's just a fun little "Easter egg" that Priess and Palencar threw into the puzzle (albeit one with some value), I'm not too terribly concerned that you can't actually see the digit when striking the line. Close enough is close enough for me. Wrist to nose doesn't work as an homage to Masquerade and it doesn't work for the Image 4 (Cleveland). And, given how prominent some of them are in the images, the degree to which we can strike a precise line decreases significantly when we use noses. Besides, which nose do we use? Image 2 has 4 altogether and Image 8 has 3. I'll allow that with the possible exception of Image 3 (sprite or "suit of armor face"), there is only one human nose in each of the other 11 images so maybe that's what we are supposed to use, but I still don't like it a much. I also tried left eye to jewel, which works better for Cleveland, but not as well for Chicago. I'll keep noodling, but index finger through jewel still works the best for me. Fun stuff.

Oregonian wrote:: Hi Oregonian, This overlay looks familiar to me as I have another magic point that is the position of the star in image 11. I will leave you to discover where it coincides on the Cleveland image as I need to digest all this thread now and see how it looks with my overlays. I know about Masquerade but when did JP know the solution was drawing lines, I wonder? If you are interested I am still considering what I call spherical objects and their sizes. Also I have another overlay which plots the position of the jewels and the zodiac signs.

Erpobdelliforme wrote:: Besides, which nose do we use? Image 2 has 4 altogether and Image 8 has 3. Erpobdelliforme wrote:: I also tried left eye to jewel, which works better for Cleveland, but not as well for Chicago. Hmm... You might want to try that census again. Only the very tips of the noses count in this puzzle, and the whirling dervish in Image 8 has cleverly hidden his wrists and pulled a bandana over his nose. Likewise, the mask in Image 2 has its nose tip obscured. And the dogtag face in Image 2 already has lines radiating out from the tip of its nose. It's almost as if the illustrator is trying to hint at something... Hmm... It's almost as if only certain eyes are meant to be used in the geometry. Fun stuff, indeed.

Unknown: I know about Masquerade but when did JP know the solution was drawing lines, I wonder? The solution and prize winner was announced in March of 1982. The timing is tight, but not impossible if The Secret was not released until the late fall of 1982. It's also possible that Preiss knew about the solution earlier (one book publisher to another perhaps), or even that as a fan of Masquerade , he had figured that lines figured into the endgame, but not exactly how or why. Having said that, I'd be a lot more comfortable with this theory if the solution to Kit Williams' puzzle was common knowledge 6 months earlier.

Erpobdelliforme wrote:: Having said that, I'd be a lot more comfortable with this theory if the solution to Kit Williams' puzzle was common knowledge 6 months earlier. I guess I don't see as much of a problem there, because this really isn't the same solution as we had in Masquerade . The solution in that book absolutely required you to draw straight lines in each picture and decipher a text from the letters around the edges. Here in The Secret we are sometimes asked to draw straight lines through pictures and body parts, but that's about where the similarity ends. The Secret is different because.... ... casques can be found without the geometry (if you have a bit of luck) ... there are no letters in the pictures and no words to assemble, ... we're connecting physical objects that need to be seen and located, and ... there are more than just straight lines involved. (The whole book is basically a tribute to Euclid.) Have you had a chance to draw the nose lines on Image 10 yet? I think that's a fun one.

Oregonian I would be interested to hear your thoughts on Image 10 in regards to lines and geometry. There appears to be a lack of things that hit anything from either lines through the hands and jewel or anything and the jewel...there is also no clear clue as to where the dig spot is on the image...it's all trees that don't exist...if this was meant to work for all images, how would it work for 10 and what would it suggest?

decibalnyc wrote:: Oregonian I would be interested to hear your thoughts on Image 10 in regards to lines and geometry. There appears to be a lack of things that hit anything from either lines through the hands and jewel or anything and the jewel Sure, here are three thoughts that come to mind: Try a different body part. Look for the image that should be paired with #10 and try an overlay. Remember that things being juggled all move around a circle in unison. Good luck! Keep us posted!

Well I have not found a match for 10, I think I will wait till someone has a formula that works universally for all of them and then try that. I live where one is buried so a lot of the time I spend on this, I try to spend half or more canvassing the area.

Unknown: Well I have not found a match for 10, I think I will wait till someone has a formula that works universally for all of them and then try that I've been playing around with this for a while and I haven't found anything that I like better than my original idea of using the left index finger through the jewel (singular elements in each image) to indicate something that you can (could) see while standing on the treasure ground. Here's what I come up with for Image 10: The 2 yellow lines are from the noses in the image. I stand by my statement that all the images have at least two noses in them, even Image 10 (Milwaukee) and Image 7 (New Orleans). Chicago has four if you count the bowman and his horse. So while this method points to a precise spot in the Image 4 (Cleveland), it requires some decision making for some of the other images. The red line connects the left index finger through the jewel, both singular elements common to all 12 images. The yellow box represents the target I think we are meant to find in the image. As an aside, I'm not sure I understand the whole overlay discussion. Probably a bad idea to dismiss something just because I don't understand it, but I will say that the tools that are being used to explore this theory were not commonly available in 1982, and the tools that were available in 1982 (tracing paper and the small images in the book) probably didn't give the level of detail that Oregonian is touting. Straightedges and marking tools, on the other hand, have been around since the dawn of civilization, and are more than accurate enough for their intended purpose here. My spider sense tells me that I wasn't the only one playing around on Paint yesterday when I should have been working.

That's awesome that you found a way to intersect some points with the jewel, if someone could find a common denominator with Cleveland and Chicago that could be applied to Image 10 I would be pretty interested, right now nothing pops out and screams THATS IT! Other than you did make a big X on the spot where the jewel is...that's pretty cool

Erpobdelliforme wrote:: The 2 yellow lines are from the noses in the image. I stand by my statement that all the images have at least two noses in them, even Image 10 (Milwaukee) and Image 7 (New Orleans). Chicago has four if you count the bowman and his horse. So while this method points to a precise spot in the Image 4 (Cleveland), it requires some decision making for some of the other images. The red line connects the left index finger through the jewel, both singular elements common to all 12 images. The yellow box represents the target I think we are meant to find in the image. You've lost me here. First, where do you see a second nose in this image? Are you saying that the land/sky border in the middle right makes a human profile? That seems like a bit of a stretch. Noses have one line going out to the tip and another line going back to join the face. I don't see that happening here. But the bigger problem is that, if you use two nose-to-jewel lines in the same picture, it doesn't get you anywhere! As you've just shown, those lines will only intersect at the jewel itself (which doesn't tell us much). You need a different type of line to make the intersection. As for technology, I can say with some confidence that nothing in the solution requires anything more complicated than drawing some lines and folding some sheets of paper. I use Photoshop for convenience, but you could easily do the same thing with a physical copy of the book. By the way, could you post your images from Flickr at a larger size? The default "link to this image" setting is a thumbnail, but you can use the pull-down list to choose a larger size. Now that we're getting into the nitty-gritty, we'll need the details.

Unknown: By the way, could you post your images from Flickr at a larger size I'm trying, but the technology seems to be eluding me today. Does this work?

Unknown: Does this work? Guess not. Someone is going to have to talk me through it. I have the images that I'm using on Photostream. But nothing I do allows me to get a full-sized image from there to here. Help would be appreciated.

Erpobdelliforme wrote:: Help would be appreciated. Sure. Here it is, step by step: Go to your photostream in Flickr and click on the image you want to post. Now you're on a page that shows the single image on a black background. Go to the lower right corner of the black space and there's an arrow for "share this photo." Click on that. In the pop-up box choose a size somewhere around 400 by 600. I wouldn't go over 1,000 pixels in any direction. Still in that pop-up box, choose Code: HTML and then choose the HTML radio button at the bottom. Now the code in that box should be pre-selected for you. Copy it and then come over to this forum. When you're ready to insert your image, click on "Img" at the top of the message space and then paste your code from Flickr between the two boxes that appear. Here's the only tricky part in the whole thing: Q4T just wants the image address, not the whole link that Flickr wraps around it. So look at what you just posted from Flickr and find where it says img src=" . Take out that part and everything that comes before it. Then find where it says " width= and take out that part and everything that comes after it. (Remember to take out the quotation marks after src= and before width= .)If you've done it all correctly, you should be left with two boxes that say "img" and an address between them that starts with https://farm and ends with .jpg (without any quotation marks in the whole thing). I know, it sounds like a hassle. But it's actually pretty fast. And remember that you can always use "preview" on this page to see if your image is showing up correctly.

Unknown: You need a different type of line to make the intersection. Fair enough. In order to get an "X" marks the spot, we'll draw a second line in Image 4 (Cleveland). Using your first line as a starting point, and going from where we think the treasure was buried, the image now looks like this: I used your points of reference for the first line ( human nose through jewel), and the point where we think the treasure was buried as the origination of the second line. It extends through the nose of the animal (the lion medallion in the middle of the wall), and past the index finger of the left hand (although wrist would also work). In order for a unified theory to work, all the elements mentioned above need to appear in the other 11 images, which I think they do. But before I go there, is this what you had in mind as well?

decibalnyc wrote:: That's awesome that you found a way to intersect some points with the jewel, if someone could find a common denominator with Cleveland and Chicago that could be applied to Image 10 I would be pretty interested, right now nothing pops out and screams THATS IT! Other than you did make a big X on the spot where the jewel is...that's pretty cool jewel alignments 1. On image 5 Chicago, the line drawn earlier from the Emerald jewel through fence post to head of horse rider, also goes through the Sapphire jewel on image 6 St Augustine and the Amethyst jewel on image 10 Milwaukee. 2. Another line from this Chicago Emerald jewel to the Opal jewel on image 9 Montreal, also goes through the Pearl jewel on image 1 San Francisco. 3. A line drawn from this Pearl jewel on image 1 San Francisco to the Ruby jewel on image 8 Houston, also goes through the Aquamarine jewel on image 4 Cleveland and the Garnet jewel on image 3 Roanoke. This line extends to my magic spot, the haloed star on image 11 Boston! (262)

Erpobdelliforme wrote:: In order for a unified theory to work, all the elements mentioned above need to appear in the other 11 images, which I think they do. But before I go there, is this what you had in mind as well? I'd say you're on the right track, but you need to refine the way you draw the second line. Remember that it's cheating to base your line on where we now know the casque was buried. To have a solid system, your lines need to be defined by other objects in the pictures and then also go through the specific treasure spot. Also, the features you use to define your lines need to be clear and prominent. Look at that nose up there on the centaur. It's shown in profile against a contrasting color. No one could dispute that the tip of the nose and the center of the jewel are very specific points. But the fingertip? It's not even shown, because the hand is clasping the chalice. And that nose of the lion in the wall is hidden in shadow. It's just like what I said earlier about the whirling dervish: If JJP is covering up some features and putting them out of sight, it's because he doesn't want us to use them with geometrical precision. And the layout here is nothing if not precise. Go back and look again at the Image 1 / Image 12 overlay if you doubt me on that.

Unknown: Remember that it's cheating to base your line on where we now know the casque was buried Not if we are trying to reverse engineer the puzzle, and then use what we've learned to go forward. You say the lines intersect at a very specific point and I say we know where that point is in this image because we know where the treasure was found in this (and only this) case. We have a good idea of where the Chicago casque was unearthed, but it is by no means as precise as this solve. Per the words of Shadowrunner: [quote]as for the location marker for the classical "X" marks the spot... we used a combination of the intersection of the rows of trees to start our dig.. if memory serves me rite. even then we were digging a hole about 3 feet in diameter and the casque was on the wall of the pit we dug.... sorry i cant remember any more.. it got pretty nuts at that point when we found it.. i remember it being only about 1.5 to 2 feet max deep though..if that helps..[quote] So, the Cleveland Image is the only one we can use with the level of precision that you are attributing to your solve. Everything else, including Chicago, is subject to speculation until the next casque is dug up. Since I'm a good 5 hours from the nearest treasure ground, I'm assisting that process in the only way I know how and that is to put the ideas out there for the shovel people to use as they see fit. What exactly are you trying to do? Because I know of two people who will go out to Lake Park this weekend and dig the damn thing up if you tell them exactly where to dig. That is what you are claiming to have figured out, isn't it?

Meh. Let's let the topic rest for awhile. Have a good weekend, everybody!

Erpobdelliforme wrote:: Because I know of two people who will go out to Lake Park this weekend and dig the damn thing up if you tell them exactly where to dig. That is what you are claiming to have figured out, isn't it? I would like to know where 92 steps up toward the concrete bridge is exactly... you know, start at the "millstone" I pointed out, and then count 92 steps up the stairwell leading to/under the bridge. I've always thought the "100 paces" was way to long a distance to actually stride and come to any specific point accurately. I'm much more inclined to believe that the "100 paces" simply referred to the Lighthouse sign and it's old location. The 92 steps would be a much more accurate count (and a strangely specific and odd number) if you could actually go 92 real steps to something.

Unknown: To have a solid system, your lines need to be defined by other objects in the pictures and then also go through the specific treasure spot The intersection of any two lines is going to go through a specific treasure spot, since theoretically, every spot in every image other than 4 and 5 (and keep in mind that we don't know exactly where the Chicago spot was like we do in Cleveland, just a very good guess) is a potential treasure spot. In order for it to be the treasure spot, someone has to go to that exact spot and dig up a casque. That's it. There is no other way. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and surmise that you plan to use what you think you know to dig one up your own self. I wish you the best of luck.

Unknown: The 92 steps would be a much more accurate count (and a strangely specific and odd number) if you could actually go 92 real steps to something But you can. Start at the bottom of the Grand Staircase. Ascend 92 steps, no more, no less. Exactly 92 steps. You are now at the top of the staircase. No more. No less. With regard to the 100 paces, it's imprecise but that's ok since I think Preiss was telling us to look for the "first young birch" once we are out of the woods, and not before. Lots of new trees in the woods. Not so many once you get out of the woods. One hundred paces gets most people out near LMD, but just in case you take bigger strides than most, Preiss hedges by telling us to stay west, i.e. do not cross LMD and look at all the young trees over there. I'd like to think Forrest Blight is correct when he suggests that somewhere out there, there is a picture that will confirm this for us. Finding that picture however, may prove as difficult as finding the casque.

Erpobdelliforme wrote:: But you can. Start at the bottom of the Grand Staircase. Ascend 92 steps, no more, no less. Exactly 92 steps. You are now at the top of the staircase. No more. No less. With regard to the 100 paces, it's imprecise but that's ok since I think Preiss was telling us to look for the "first young birch" once we are out of the woods, and not before. Lots of new trees in the woods. Not so many once you get out of the woods. One hundred paces gets most people out near LMD, but just in case you take bigger strides than most, Preiss hedges by telling us to stay west, i.e. do not cross LMD and look at all the young trees over there. I'd like to think Forrest Blight is correct when he suggests that somewhere out there, there is a picture that will confirm this for us. Finding that picture however, may prove as difficult as finding the casque. I agree that this is a very reasonable theory, but it has been around a while. I am just wondering about the step count from the "millstone" to the bridge for fun. I'm not going to clog up the board with some crazy theory regardless. I just like to explore things until something gets dug up.

As far as the 100 paces goes... From under either of the bridges, when you walk 100 paces along the path (and I have done this many times) you end up at the clearing where the large cottonwoods are. If you took the south ravine made of timbers, you come out by the large cottonwood, if you take the north ravine made of stones and dirt, you come out about 50 yards north of the large cottonwood and the south ravine. From directly under the bridge, it's 100 paces give or take a step or 2 depending on how tall you are, and you end up at the end of each trail respectively. The staircase is about 125 yards from the lighthouse Lighthouse is about 70 yards from the start of the ravine Ravine to the bridge along the trail...maybe 80 yards Bridge to the clearing is 100 paces Clearing to the oval track is about 120 yards The longest trek is from Kenwood and LMD down to the staircase which is close to 3/4 of a mile. I am estimating these distances only by memory, Maps would give you a more accurate reading.

If you need to find it all on Maps just look at the Rebus and match one of these up and the others will be easy to find in order Staircase is Flower Walking stick is Golf Course Key is Lighthouse Ball after Key - Bridge Ball before gem - First young birch Gem - treasure grounds Millstone - Oval track https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lake+ ... d30d6b9f94

The "Key" would not line up map wise, but that is the order of the verse.

Unknown: I agree that this is a very reasonable theory, but it has been around a while Unknown: I just like to explore things until something gets dug up. Thank you. Too bad the marker trees didn't have the same longevity. Methinks we would be looking for casque #4 if that were the case. Me too. Good thing there is no shortage of things to explore in this puzzle. I'm sure one of the posters on the ground in Milwaukee will get you the information that you requested the next time they happen to take a stroll in Lake Park. No reasonable (mill)stone unturned and all that.

Great show! You definitely have me looking at it again with new perspective. I thought the positions of the gems had a specific meaning as to where the casque is buried.

dellucc wrote:: Great show! You definitely have me looking at it again with new perspective. I thought the positions of the gems had a specific meaning as to where the casque is buried. I always kind of thought (still trying to prove this one out) that the position of the gem in the image was a rough location of where the casque was...ONLY when looking at it relative to the site visual in the image as well (not the whole image). (e.g. the jewel to the lower right of the fence in I5, and semi-central and below the columns in I4) But that also would mean that one would have to determine the site visual clue in the image to know for sure too.

I think you're on to something.

Is this our "fixture"? Perspective is all wrong (it should be to the right of the fence as we face it), but the shape (including the conduit below the box) are representative, and the general location seems about right. Just wondering if this advances anyone's line theory as it may give us another treasure ground locater. As an aside, I noticed that the last five lines of the Chicago verse, as well as the representation of Lake Michigan from the Fountan of the Great Lakes statue actually lead you across East Jackson, and away from the treasure ground if you are meant to approach it from the south (over Lincoln's left shoulder). Just something to keep in mind.