Quest4Treasure

In the interests of trying to keep the verse and image threads less cluttered with overall questions of methodology, I'd like to move at least this branch of the discussion here to this thread.  Let's keep the verse stuff in the verse threads and the image stuff in the image threads, and everything else, elsewhere.

erexere wrote:Okay shecrab...telling folks to expect me to go away is just a neutral statement then?

It just seems odd and shows a lack pf human compassion that you think its okay to go around telling people that someone has been around long enough...im not saying that about you am I?

She isn't telling you to go away.  Rather, like me (and others), she keeps trying to find new ways of trying to communicate with you.

It's frustrating, Eric.  Because, you do seem to enjoy a sort of reverse logic at times, where you will take a multi-layered free association and think that it's simple, but you completely ignore the concrete clues that are directly tied into most of these proposed casque sites.  If you were building a persuasive case, you'd be saying things like, "Yes, I understand that there are these concrete clues at, say, the FOY park, but here's even *more* concrete evidence for why I think it's in Oregon."  And you stitch together photographs at the angle you want, and you rotate the images to whatever angle you need, draw little yellow lines on them, and you try to make the case that, say, the "blob" looks like Pac-man, or the boy in the clock looks like a steeple.  None of the other solutions have required anywhere near this level of convolution to make the clues fit.  What we're saying -- with varying levels of directness -- is that your methodology is not appropriate for this puzzle.  There's two casques' worth of solid evidence that the more indirect your interpretations get, the far less likely you will be to find a casque.

The problem now has nothing to do with who's right and wrong.  If you'll go back through the history of this board and look at how disagreements and ideas have been dealt with in the past, you'll see that most of these discussions have been productive and respectful.  Evidence is presented; criticism is presented; the cycle repeats.  I like your enthusiasm, and (sometimes) your creativity.  It's good to have someone to go against the grain and bring a fresh perspective.  Thing is, though, you don't absorb this criticism productively.  There's very little, "I see what you're saying... let me think about that."  You just keep the firehose of images and interpretations coming.  The resistance you're getting lately has a lot more to do with how little you seem to be interested in actually engaging in a real conversation.  There are only so many times we can say the same thing before we get tired of trying to get through to you.  I'm afraid that here, even spelling it out, that you'll make some crack about me not understanding analogies on the SAT or something.  (And since you were wondering, I made a good living teaching the SAT for a while, so, yes: I understand them.)

This isn't about "resentment" or a "lack of human compassion."  No one is "berating" you.  It'd be great for you to just slow the heck down and start thinking through some of these things that people raise with you.  For as much time as you've put into this hunt, they've put in more.  And I am certain that they're every bit as smart as you -- so, really, they might actually have something valid to say on the subject.  The reason they haven't dug a casque up yet has much less to do with their methodology being wrong, than the fact that many of the literal signposts and confirmers just aren't there anymore.  Heck, even the world had changed before very first casque was dug up -- BP had to clarify a clue to the finders, because some of the trees were no longer there -- and this was less than a year after he buried it!  You have got to keep that context in mind, always, because there is always the possibility that you're basing hours of your life (and potentially hundreds of your dollars on archaeologists, etc.) on a theory that has a flawed premise at its foundation.

I like this hunt, and I like the idea of maybe one day seeing another casque get unearthed.  But this isn't the way to go.

Bigmatty, I've seen you swoop down with some excellent criticism, but you've also brushed aside coherent ideas like they are pointless drivel.  You seem confused about what drives my points.  It's not easy to come up with a consistent theme, check facts, and suffer a begging style.  You sound equally dismayed about the way I convey my ideas as you are about their substance.

I try to be conscientious about when I offer a rotated image.  I can think of at least three cases where I said "this is a rotated image..." or a split image or a negative and cite the example in Image 4 where the Terminal Tower is negative and upside down.

I did not say with any guarantee that clockboy was the steeple.  I offered it as a comparison only for the reason that it was an option that I considered since the steeple was theoretically visible from a spot on Basin St.  Maltedfalcon quickly obliged by shooting it down, thank you btw, and I backed off of any insistence to the effect and moved on to a new perspective on a different part of the church that actually looked like a better fit.  It remains a consideration.  There is an example of having a constructive engaging interaction.

I'm not interested in persuading my Oregon case as a point in opposition to FOY.  I think FOY is a great theory and I've said so more than once.  I brought forth my Oregon theory independently and without regard to FOY.  I'm sorry if it doesn't meet your standard or taste for a concrete argument.  If it has to be that is the lynchpin in my not being well received then so be it.  I've tried to be open and forthcoming about my approach and why I think one thing leads to another.  My essential approach to this puzzle is strictly about looking for a theme, finding a correlation that fits a person, place, or thing and looking for the key factors that inform a method of finding a dig spot.

My premise is only that some puzzles are different than others.  They are all presented with seemingly different variables at work.  Look at the variation in the imagery.  Look at the variation in verse.  Chicago wasn't exactly like Cleveland.  Taking a fresh perspective without forcing a Chicago/Cleveland method isn't necessarily wrong.  It's only an interesting and different approach until we learn a result.

It's no big deal to me if I have wasted my time or my dollar to find or not find a casque.  What's more important is sharing the experience of participating in an amazing hunt.  I agree that my theories are way way out of the ordinary, and many of your points are valuable criticism for my consideration, but you have it wrong if you think I haven't been berated, given guff, or called a troll.

Compassion is about understanding others.  I maintain the view that maltedfalcon is making a choice to use a rigid method and it's potentially wrong. I give it a 51% chance of being exactly right.  I respect and admire his recent work towards the SF casque.  I didn't chide him in the least for not finding it.  Of course he's been around and active much longer than I and he's generally better received...and also he's an expert in most fact checking much like shecrab.  As I've been evolving my ideas and offering tid bits to evaluate at a fast pace (not saying anyone is slow here...It's obvious that i've been busy), I think it's become clear to everyone that I've fixed my position around here as an outsider and an annoyance.  I spend a good amount of time investigating other folks ideas and I wanted to weigh in on something forest blight said about North Brother Island but I realized it was too difficult to share my view and not seem like I'm touting my entire shelf of misfit theories.  I need to work on that.  He resurfaced a good point of evidence, but it conflicted with two of my theories so much that I simply couldn't see myself sounding very genuine in my criticism.  It's a healthy idea, I'll give it that.

Let's be clear about methodology but also access that informal quality of having fun and being surprised with wonder and discovery.  Were Chicago and Cleveland so interesting that you would love to see the rest of the casques follow rote application of reverse engineered ideas?  It's been how long since the last find?  How long since the first?  How much time and dithering does it take to turn up the rest of these casques if they haven't yet been lost to oblivion?  I can't say much of a theme presents itself in Image4, which looks like a centaur standing on a wall...pretty darn simplistic.  The only twist there was that there wasn't an actual centaur statue at the site!  But look at image 8 and tell me you don't see something deeper.  Image 7 has something really interesting going on.  Image 10 looks every so simple but it has lots of possibility.  Each different image just puzzles so differently that I'm in absolute awe of both JJP and Preiss.  Yet you seem to be saying they are all simple and met with a uniform approach.  As I said before, I can understand and respect that approach.  Please don't judge me so harshly that I work the 49% option.  I know you're all paying attention, but are you all understanding?  If each layer beyond you're standard assessment for what is needed means I'm that much less likely to be right, then that just means my option has shrank, but it is still there as a possibility, so don't confuse least likely with 'wrong' or 'not possible'.

eric said
http://www.quest4treasure.co.uk/forum/h ... 27#p119827
I try to be conscientious about when I offer a rotated image.  I can think of at least three cases where I said "this is a rotated image..." or a split image or a negative and cite the example in Image 4 where the Terminal Tower is negative and upside down.

not sure if this was ever mentioned,if you turn the img 180,that would put the park and garden
in the right perspective from the T tower, where the garden is if you were standing here
i hope i said that right
http://g.co/maps/r3jg8

cw, that's really interesting.  Doesn't it seem like turning around with your back to the Terminal Tower you would be standing at the intersection of W. Superior and Ontario and turned to the Northeast to have the TT just behind your right shoulder as the page shows flipped 180 with TT on the lower right side?  I thought Euclid was the way to go, now it seems taking Superior Ave all the way to the park is almost a straight shot to the Gardens.

I considered that possibility, however superior passes the park, it goes over it, no place to turn, no clue to turn.

With Euclid we are given the turn point at the Triangle.
Also with superior there is no indication which way to go.
however the actual street you are standing on in that image is a one way street which merges onto euclid going toward the park.

cw0909 wrote:

eric said
http://www.quest4treasure.co.uk/forum/h ... 27#p119827
I try to be conscientious about when I offer a rotated image.  I can think of at least three cases where I said "this is a rotated image..." or a split image or a negative and cite the example in Image 4 where the Terminal Tower is negative and upside down.

not sure if this was ever mentioned,if you turn the img 180,that would put the park and garden
in the right perspective from the T tower, where the garden is if you were standing here
i hope i said that right
http://g.co/maps/r3jg8

Thats very cool and consistent with Chicago and  SF(assuming I am right, if you flip the image so the map lines up - Lincolns head - representing lincoln park is now on the correct side of the map. and approximately the correct location.

malt what would be really cool,is if the other 9img followed the same 180 alignment
it would be much easier,if you had a start dir from the start,i may be wrong,i think
wilhouse refered to the img,as needing turned to see the alignment, of X landmark
way back when,and if thats so,thats 4 out of 12,well another casque may get dug
this yr after all,if the 180 alignment idea holds up

Parks have been seen as the likeliest place to find a casque now since the two found were in parks.  It's a good bet that others might be in parks as well.  Reference to at least one point followed by an general area and a strict angle seemed to be used; we can see the method applied to Chicago's fence fixture and then picking a line directly to it, and perpendicular to the wall perimeter and in the middle of 10 by 13 trees.  Cleveland had some very specific instructions, but Egbert dug extensively before finding the shattered box.

I believe Preiss worked to use the most stable environments for his hunt.  Historic sites, monuments, memorials, things of rock, engravings, facades, and street names.  Time affects these items in the least way.  Some historic sites get bulldozed, some streets get renamed like MLK.  Most parks stay well maintained once established.  I doubt he'd pick a park that was on the outs.

Image 5 had a bunch of visual elements to satisfy an erratic trek through around and through the general area of Grant Park.  Image 4 had just a few: terminal tower, twin columns, and a wall.  What wasn't utilized in either was the main personality in each image.  There wasn't a giant with a hat unless it was a metaphor for Abe Lincoln, and there wasn't a centaur.  Use of an iconic starting point and a combination of picture and word clues helps navigate by street names.  When you think about, there's a number of basic ways to communicate a set of directions or path instructions.  Whether an image uses one approach or two, we'll have to be attentive to all conceivable navigational methods.

The FOY theory lands you at the park directly. I didn't catch any mention of street name methods or Iconic structures in the area.  Image 6 doesn't offer a whole lot of elements beyond the one personality of Ponce de Leon and so it becomes a more abstract word search and descriptive approach.  The non-linear aspect of that approach defies anything simple as lining up a visual confirmer with a description.  A palm tree in the background doesn't seem unique enough.  The white rock in the water looks like the thing to be found...but nobody has found that exact rock in FOY...what happened to it?  Is the iceberg next to tree a visual metaphor or complex rebus like eyes-berg[amot] + tree, as in "see a citrus tree"?  The horse and rider are both upon a higher peak, looking down and away from the white rock.  How does this image play out according to the methods used in Image 4 or 5?  So far, from what I've read and seen in the highlighted and circled images, I see a major departure from the empirical view.  There are excellent descriptions and word matches to places and fixtures like the observatory and salt cellar but they don't connect as simply as the columns did to the rectangle and wall of image 4.  FOY is a mess despite all the love and attention it's been given.

My personal theory on Image 6 applies to Verse 5 and uses the "222" as a highway and exit number.  The road climbs and curves to a vista where the first historic site has a plaque that advertises the heaviness of the monument: "here sits a 50-ton boulder in honor of Sam Hill...".  The line "Weight on roots extended"  The boulder sits on three square stone platforms, each extending out farther than the one above it.  There's little embellishment needed to see the simplicity in that descriptive to visual confirmer.  The rest of the verse flows smoothly as butter and all elements fit snugly.  The one thing that gave me the most trouble was "wingless bird ascending" since it seems to apply in more ways than one, but only one way supports a method consistent with finding a white stone and taking 12 paces.  It was the folklore of the local region that tied the three nearest mountains together into a legendary Indian love triangle.  My methodology was simple, I recognized some options with the first line of the verse: Lane, could be a person, place, or thing...Joseph Lane, or a roadway, a county, or a bowling alley.  Since I live in Lane County I had to satisfy my curiosity and so I proceeded to investigate the meaning of "222".  Step by step each thing discovered confirmed without need for any loose imaginings.  Now that I've been to the site and researched many options, I can't find any room at all for being fooled into thinking this is the right way to go with this image.

Wilhouses (and other contributors) theory on Hermann Park was treated much like the FOY theory.  Start with being dumped at the park entrance.  Lots of good descriptions and a loosely connected path to the Children's Zoo.  Where as much visual and verse information was reserved for describing the treasure ground.  Sometimes the desire for economy can be misleading.  I tried a number of different approaches and admit I got very fooled at times by things which have changed a great deal over time, like the Hospital lot or the miniature train track additions.  My latest strategy approaches the verse as a collection of three line breaks and the last line alone looking very dodgy, "A whistle sounds."  It fits snugly to see the Cathedral and the Glassel school as confirmers.  I believe if you are set in their proximity, the next line Friendship South seems to apply to Hermann Park.  Friendship..."her man"...a girlfriend and her boyfriend...seems like a snug fit.  When we pursue the Take your task to the 982 line we are now making a path towards the center of the park and beyond.  I think it's a honeypot setup to stick us in the CZ.  The visual confirmer of the Elf says it all...trickster.  If it's not there then where is it?  It is at this point you have to have fun, climb high (a tower if you will), take flight and fall gently somewhere within these descriptive confirmers that fits the image of sand, columns, and something charging like a rhino...like Samel Houston signaling a charge from his steed.  I'm unclear where the park boundaries are, but the tree covered areas near the Mecom fountain and Sam Houston statue seems like the way to go.  Is that inside the park boundary?  

Redundancies have been discussed some but I think they need much more attention.  Why would Preiss write a single word if it didn't have enough meaning to go with it?  Isn't one well selected word enough to make a point or does he really want to put redundancies in his work?  Hey, this is Hermann park....oh btw, Hermann park here...did you know this is Hermann park?  Blah.  I think the Melville quote had a sly purpose.  Hermann Park is a big happy place that gets lots of visitors...shouldn't it be expected that we'd figure out the 982 or land on a Zoo context given the rhino/camel?  I don't think concluding Melville's first name is the only use of that line.  A tower then?  A high standing structure...or something which tows, like a train engine...its strong and especially a delight to ride in miniature scale (until you find out how not cushy is the ride).  Hermann Park is full of attractions.  It seems right that we would be invited to visit every literal connection: the trains, the lions, the rhino's, snowflake, etc., but then you're stuck turning over every rock, looking for every discrete dig possible spot...and with what methodology?  Overlay?  The gem located next to the ball-topped column (globe lamp)?  In the center of three statues...?  (Sorry, Wilhouse, I know you tried everything you could).  Going beyond the literal is all that's left to do if a bulldozer and a highly motivated hunter didn't find it.  The likeness in shape to the Houston roundabout and large rectangle pool is clearly meant to be seen as the column, but how is that like our towering long range icons in Image 4 and 5?  It's not, but what else is there in this desert image?  Nothing.  This is a departure where the verse does the work of describing the city of Houston's iconic tower.  I really think it's going to be the First City Tower.  In 1981, it was high on the iconic list.  It has four alike in it's design.  What's in the middle of it?  From a distance, Fannin street points to it's middle.  I think this sounds unlikely to most, but it just utilizes a shift in perspective from visual to written.  Both are used to convey information.  We only prefer the visual method because of the discovered casques.  There is no basis beyond that to exclude written descriptive information from being as applicable as visual information.

I don't know if I've opened up any worthy ideas to discuss, but please give it consideration.  I promise I'll hold off on the more divergent ideas for a day or two.

erexere wrote:

I believe Preiss worked to use the most stable environments for his hunt.

this is an erroneous assumption, as we know BP believed they would all be found quickly, you cant assume much in the way of permanent markers
which is why a llama named snowflake is actually an acceptable clue

Also, dont forget that the Cleveland Image was connected, via the story and the I's jewel, to the Hellas.  Although the Greeks call the country Hellas or Ellada (Greek: Ελλάς, Ελλάδα) and its official name is Hellenic Republic, in English the country is called Greece.  This casque was found in the Greek Cultural Gardens.

A few responses about your Houston thoughts:

As maltedfalcon said, BP expected these to be solved within a year or two.  He didn't have longevity in mind.  Think of this: even the 982 train -- which everyone almost unanimously agrees is, in fact, the train -- isn't there anymore.  They moved a giant multi-ton fixture that looked as permanent as anything.  Not every clue still exists anymore.  Things Change.

erexere wrote:I believe if you are set in their proximity, the next line Friendship South seems to apply to Hermann Park.  Friendship..."her man"...a girlfriend and her boyfriend...seems like a snug fit.

Another more literal possibility: An out-of-order confirmer for "Texas".  We're taught in Texas schools from an early age that the name Texas is derived from the local Native Americans' word for "Friendship."  Friendship South = Texas, a state in the South.  (This is, actually, common knowledge around here.  http://bit.ly/xy9NfO)

I think it's a honeypot setup to stick us in the CZ.

I think you're overthinking things.  BP expected these to be solved within a year or two.

Redundancies have been discussed some but I think they need much more attention.  Why would Preiss write a single word if it didn't have enough meaning to go with it?  Isn't one well selected word enough to make a point or does he really want to put redundancies in his work?  Hey, this is Hermann park....oh btw, Hermann park here...did you know this is Hermann park?

I think you're overstating these "redundancies".  I see one clue that signifies a nearby art school ("Fortress north, cold as glass") -- much like "M and B set in stone".  And I see one clue that's a confirmer for Hermann Park (the Melville quote).  The 982 train is another thing inside Hermann Park, as is the aqua tunnel, etc., but at this point, the purpose of the clues is to get you to the specific casque site within the park.  They're not just redundant confirmers.

I don't think concluding Melville's first name is the only use of that line.

I think it stands just fine on its own as a sort of a semi-obscure signifier for Hermann Park.  He did, clearly, put in quotes from not-so-well-known sources.  "Here is a sovereign people...", for example.  I think of these as bonuses for the well-read.  If you get them, it was like a little wink from BP.  I do think that this was as obscure as he got.

The gem located next to the ball-topped column (globe lamp)?  In the center of three statues...?

It seems like a good idea, but there isn't any evidence that the location of the gem in the images has anything to do with the burial sites.

As for "In the center of four alike", well, not every clue still exists anymore.  Wilhouse's best guess was that the casque was buried somewhere in the center of four of those cinderblock statues, and I think that's as good a guess as any.  BP didn't know they'd be moved.  He expected these to be solved in a year or two.

The likeness in shape to the Houston roundabout and large rectangle pool is clearly meant to be seen as the column but how is that like our towering long range icons in Image 4 and 5?  It's not, but what else is there in this desert image?  Nothing.

There are actually a few markers in the zoo.  The lampposts are an unusual design -- large spheres on top of posts.  I still remember these from when I was a kid; they're fairly unique.  Someone recently posted a good match for the rhino on top of a pole, as a sign for the Houston Zoo.  Wilhouse has pointed out, many times, that the hat on the djinn is the same as the hat on the gnome in the CZ.  The Chicago/Cleveland solves had about 3-4 literal confirmers.  This tracks pretty well with what we know to be true in the other confirmed solutions.

This is a departure where the verse does the work of describing the city of Houston's iconic tower.  I really think it's going to be the First City Tower.  In 1981, it was high on the iconic list.  It has four alike in it's design.

Okay. Chicago had the Water Tower; Cleveland has Terminal Tower; and Milwaukee has City Hall.  You definitely have my attention here.  But I do have to tell you the First City Tower has never been considered an "iconic" tower in Houston, at least not to my knowledge.  It's a rather bland, boring office building.  If BP wanted to use a building to signify Houston, its best-known one at the time was the Astrodome.

Anyway.  I know you don't want to leave any word un-meaning-ified, but I think with Houston especially, it's important to remember: not every clue still exists anymore.  Things Change.  If any other casques are dug up, it'll be where things change less, and the clues have a higher likelihood of still existing.  Maybe like the Roanoke one.

Malt, I wasnt assuming he was trying to design it to last more than a year or two, but I can see how my stance might be seen that way.  I am trying to say it seems that BP made a conscious effort to avoid the less stable environments whether it was a stylistic choice or just good commn sense.  Early on I recall wondering if he used an art exibit in Milwaukee as a reference point (this was a current art show that wouldnt be expected to change in a year or two).  I was 100% wrong on that btw, since I was trying to pair Image 2 with Milwaukee at the time.  Im just saying given each general location there are more established and stable places than others.  I would focus on those oldest and historically important or recognized sites first.  Anything with a plaque is a good start, even places that were only recently put on the historic register.

As a point of style, I thought he was going for anything that fit an old and established context to preserve a fair folk theme.  Associating each in a culturally distinct, older, natural setting.

Big, I didnt know that about Texas, what a great piece of information, attaching meaning of a Native American reference to signify the state sounds solid.

I might be overthinking many things as usual, but it sure seems like BP selected the ambiguous items to play with our focus, not to confuse those items with redundancies.  His efforts might have been as simple as recognize the big clues that home in on the general area and then quickly find the confirmers after getting a good feel for the area, its statues, and architectural standouts.  It couldve been that he made the trail as clear as day at the time and done nothing to be elusive, but I find his work more compelling as a reward system to those who solved some of the fairy contorted challenges.

The working definition of iconic isnt in my mind something that has to be universally recognized as it a city identified component.  I see it as a matter of perspective.  The Terminal Tower was very distinctive and fits that purpose, but I feel the more important use is to see something from a perspective or good distance that does have a distinctive character.  First Tower isnt the Astrodome in comparison, I agree, but it does remain distinct from a long distant view on Fannin street.  It just sits in the middle of the perspective and has those four column like shadowy features in its face.  In Boston, I like the Citgo sign as a long range clue.  In Rodanthe, I like the Chicomacomico water tower.  In Corbett, I like Sentinel (Phoca) Rock which stands out in the middle of the Columbia River.  In Montreal, I like the the lamp in front of the Railroad mogul's historic residence...which is a real departure from long range and probably a significant indicator in the difficulty level of that solution.  In Florida, I'd say its Ponce's statue.  SF is a tough one to decide on, it offers several choices, which adds a layer of difficulty rather than making things easy.  New Orleans uses the Superdome.  Sumter in Charleston.  The First Towers face where the column shapes are vertically stacked succesively and diminish in proportion based on a close up view could explain the horizontal spread of literal columns also similarly proportioned in the background of the image.  I said verse did the work to describe the iconic structure as an exception but now I realize it is more likely a Fannin street signifier.

Big, i like your perspective on the obscure quotings as winks, but my suspicions remain that if he had the option to affix it to a specific challenge point, I think he knew what a thrill and sense of accomplishment it would bring.

fox wrote:Also, dont forget that the Cleveland Image was connected, via the story and the I's jewel, to the Hellas.  Although the Greeks call the country Hellas or Ellada (Greek: Ελλάς, Ελλάδα) and its official name is Hellenic Republic, in English the country is called Greece.  This casque was found in the Greek Cultural Gardens.

That LOJ connection really does a number on us doesnt it?  As long as BP maintained a cultural distinction between jewels then it remains likely the LOJ will identify with things to some extent, but to say Clevelands connection follows the association isnt sound.

May i suggest Milwaukee is the Polish connection?  I might also suggest Montreal is the French connection, where a puck is smuggled to Vancouver, B.C...

erexere wrote:

fox wrote:Also, dont forget that the Cleveland Image was connected, via the story and the I's jewel, to the Hellas.  Although the Greeks call the country Hellas or Ellada (Greek: Ελλάς, Ελλάδα) and its official name is Hellenic Republic, in English the country is called Greece.  This casque was found in the Greek Cultural Gardens.

May i suggest Milwaukee is the Polish connection?  I might also suggest Montreal is the French connection, where a puck is smuggled to Vancouver, B.C...

Hang on a minute...the connections are explicitly set out through the association of each image with a gem, and the litany which ties each gem to a nationality. France corresponds with New Orleans, and Poland doesn't come into it.

1 San Fransisco - China (Chinatown?)
2 Charleston - Africa
3 Roanoke - England (Elizabethan Gardens / Lost Colony)
4 Cleveland - Greece (Greek garden)
5 Chicago - Ireland
6 Florida - Spain (Ponce de Leon)
7 New Orleans - France
8 Houston - Arabia
9 Montreal - Dutch (Fur trade? See P27 footnotes)
10 Milwaukee - Germany
11 Boston - Italy
12 New York - Russia (Gershwin?)

I get that, but isnt there some healthy skepticism that the actual jewel locations were not based on the Litany?  One person claiming to have had a conversation with Preiss recalls him saying that.  The writings other than the verse were essentially seperate from his secret casque site selections depending only on the verses, right?