Talk:The Nine Unknown

Question
What i dont understand about the "Nine Unknown Men" is that do these guys live a life outside their physical bodies or is it passed on from one person to another as the former dies? Any ideas?

Unclear, from my knowledge. There is a clear parallel with the Chinese legend of the Eight Immortals in my opinion... the (supposedly) older Indian tradition may have even originated or heavily influenced the other. Probably this should be mentioned in the article but I will wait for comment. Like the Nine, each of the Immortals has a specific power, etc. However, if modern versions of the legend (which seem to have originated with Blavatsky) are to be believed, membership of the Nine would have to be some sort of post or position. Obviously Chandra Bose hasn't been alive for 2000 years! On the other hand, we're dealing with Hinduism here, and reincarnation, so who knows. Mjk2357 12:59, 13 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Some people take this legend seriously. But if they're supposed to be secret, how and why would anybody know about them?  Has anybody tried to answer that question?

References & Unanswered Questions
Most of this article comes from Morning of the Magicians, which is dubious itself. The authors get the publication date of Mundy's Nine Unknown wrong.

What books by Jacolliot mention the Nine? Several sources link him to the story, but none give a title.

The Nine are a part of Theosophical lore, but what Theosophical books mention them?

Is The Nine Unknown the only Mundy book that mentions the Nine?

The article from Computers and Automation is an odd reference. Maybe it should be moved to the bronze head article. Or simply deleted. A description of the unlikeliness such a device seems redundant.

The mention of Bulwer-Lytton may be a mistake. At least one web site claims that The Coming Race mentions the Nine, but it does not. The book is available from project Gutenberg. There may be another Bulwer-Lytton novel that mentions them. (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1951/1951-h/1951-h.htm)

--Strangething (talk) 07:06, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

the start
the start of the notion of nine unknown men gained recongnition because of the existence of iron pillar.since the reasons of its non rusting could not be explained and the knowledge of manufacturing of immortal iron existed in india in past is thus verified, it is widely held belief that this knowledge is still there. And an secret society guards it, so that it doesnt go into the wrong hands.

nids 21:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The start of the notion gained recognition? Sounds pretty dubious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LimaMonk (talk • contribs) 14:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

the first paragraph
The first paragraph cites a lot of dubious references, without making any effort to cite the sources. The part that says that "Theories have also begun to surface claiming that Rama and Atlantis might have had war using nuclear technology, and destroyed each other." is ludicrous.

--Mbm233 15:30, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

shall be removing now known part
i am hearing that the composition and art of making similar iron has been found from 90s. i shall be removing it till it is perfectly accepted. i am doing so because there have been innumerable claims at decoding the secret art but all of them proved hoaxes. as a fact, IIT bombay is doing this project from 1992 and has claimed breakthroughs many times. even BHU attempted. nids 16:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Supposedly the phosphorous in the iron created a film that didn't allow it to rust. --Falconus 15:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Filling RTI with the archeology survey of india will do some good....Last i heard it,the mystery was cracked Yourdeadin (talk) 16:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)yourdeadin

The Nine Divines
I do not know of any connection between the Nine Divines in the Elder Scrolls and this secret society. I am deleting this reference, but will whoever wrote it please explain why it was there? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yelir61 (talk • contribs) 04:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC).

Dubious Topic
As far as history texts tell us and as the article on Navaratnas in Wikipedia says Ashoka never ever formed a society. What's more all the text that is written has been copied without a change from websites whose reliability can easily be questioned. I wish the editors would check its authenticity and delete the article if unauthentic Tomgeorge22 (talk) 11:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

The nine unknown men by tablot mundy
The book by tablot mundy on the nine unknown is up for download here....

http://www.tejaswy.com/the-nine-unknown-men-tablot-mundy-ebook-download/

Lot more detail is given about the nine books and the working of nine unknown men

Each member of the 9 has 9 sub members ,who in turn have 9 more sub member this chain goes on .. each one of them researches a topic and like this, the research work is broken down into topics to specific topics to research....this way the work load is shared, The findings are also reported in the same manner but only entered int to the book by the main head of the groups

Details which are are given in that book I din't really know how to enter them ...so..I was hoping that you guys could help me out

Yourdeadin (talk) 21:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)yourdeadin

The last time I was on this page the Nine unknown men wasnt solely depicted as a novel, what happened to all the other stuff that used to be on here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.50.107 (talk) 22:58, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Writing style
Quite a lot of this article is writen in an informal, almost joking style. And it would also appear to be clearly biased to wards the nine being true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User: (talk • contribs)

Jacolliot's book
Jacolliot appears to have published his Occult Science in India during his lifetime. I appear to have a snippet of a recension here, dated 1885. It is difficult to find reference to even the 1901 reprint, most references out there are to the 1919 edition. --dab (𒁳) 15:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I've got it, it's 1884. Obviously, this article should be about Jacolliot's book and its reception in Theosophy etc. --dab (𒁳) 15:28, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 1884 is actually the date of the English translation. The French original was published in 1875. --dab (𒁳) 15:31, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Like many 19th century occult stories this one has gathered bizarre beliefs and stories around it like a pseudo-religious snowball. Disentangling the web of semi-linked occult beliefs to get at the core of this one would be a good thing.  Especially if this means excising the pillar of delhi stuff for the reasons I have stated elsewhere - that all comes from ONE very unreliable source; Chariots of the Gods. Simonm223 (talk) 15:32, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Simonm223, it's not "unreliable", it's fantasy. I understand that Jacolliot was a genuine conspiracy theorist, but that Mundy's retelling was ostensibly fiction. Not sure about Morning of the Magicians, were they trying to write fiction or were they revealing the Truth? --dab (𒁳) 15:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree entirely. But it's also the only source I've found for the pillar thing; making it fiction about the pillar thing and thus not a reliable source of fact. Simonm223 (talk) 15:45, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * According to Gary Valentine Lachman's Turn Off Your Mind: The Mystic Sixties and the Dark Side of the Age of Aquarius, The morning of the magicians was a bestseller, very influential, and sparked-off the fascination with the occult in the 1960s. May be worth exploring/adding at Le Matin des magiciens; I am just mentioning it here to keep related discussion in one place. Abecedare (talk) 16:08, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Gah! Now I have to read that whole book! "Turn Off Your Mind" is a book I've thought occasionally about writing... looks like Gary Valentine Lachman beat me to the punch. :D Simonm223 (talk) 17:04, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

ok, I am struggling to pinpoint this "Nine Unknown" thing in Jacolliot's text. The epithet appears to be Mundy's. The best (*coughs*) reference I have so far claiming that the NUM are Jacolliot's is Pickett and Prince, The Stargate Conspiracy: The Truth about Extraterrestrial life and the Mysteries of Ancient Egypt  (1999), p. 264. But where Jacolliot is introducing them I do not know. Sacred-texts.com has the full text of the 1919 reprint of the 1884 English translation. Googling "nine" within this text, I find no reference to any "nine unknown men". Googling 'Asoka' or 'Ashoka' gives me nothing. Where is this Jacolliot reference? Lots of people on the web credit "Wikipedia" with this. This stuff begins to pop up even on google books. I guess "Wikipedia" sounds better than Mjk2357 (2006). --dab (𒁳) 16:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The impression I am getting is that it was the The morning of the magicians that (possibly falsely) attributed the NUM to Jacolliot's writings and linked it to Mundy's fiction. Unfortunately I haven't been able to see the text of MOTM yet, and this and this are the best link I can pull up. It is possible that even the story of Jacolliot-origins of the legend is a legend! The mind boggles. Abecedare (talk) 16:21, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * the Ufologists do this all the time. It isn't possible to produce decent pseudoscience if you aren't completely messing up your sources and citations at every iteration. --dab (𒁳) 16:23, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * According to this critical biography of Mundy, MOTM author, Jacques Bergier was a big fan of Mundy, helped popularize his writings in France and, most importantly, considered Mundy's fiction to be insightful and revelatory. Suggestive. Abecedare (talk) 16:30, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Mundy
if our suspicions are correct, the whole thing was invented by Mundy for his 1923 novel. The authors of the Morning of the Magicians of 1960 would then have put an earlier label on it by attributing it to Jacolliot, presumably because Mundy was ostensibly fiction while Jacolliot was being serious about lost continents and what not. Here I catch a snippet of Morning attributing the NUM to Jacolliot, on p. 36. This would then appear to have been handed around as "legend" as opposed to a concept in a 1923 novel from the 1960s. --dab (𒁳) 16:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Aha, this page seems to be a copyvio of the relevant portion of MOTM! See also my above note about Mundy-Bergier. Abecedare (talk) 16:32, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

ok, I think we can safely conclude that the NUM are a fictional secret society, introduced in Mundy's 1923 novel, which for obscure reasons was taken for gospel by Bergier, and handed around as "ancient legend" since the 1960 success of morning of the magicians. --dab (𒁳) 16:40, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * True. One last possible loophole: Bergier mentions Jacolliot, but does not name Occult science in India in particular. It is possible that Jacolliot talks about such stuff in some other work; although I didn't find anything on Google books including in The Bible in India: Hindoo origin of Hebrew and Christian revelation, which looked promising. We don't have any evidence either way, but given the type of works Jacolliot produced, I wouldn't put the past him either. Abecedare (talk) 17:00, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought of this too. It is in principle possible that Jacolliot mentions the NUM somewhere in his collected works, Muny stole the idea from him without crediting him, and Bergier discovered the Jacolliot reference and informs us of it in Morning of the Magicians, but without saying where in Jacolliot's work he found it. This scenario is certainly conceivable, but it doesn't strike me as very likely. We can credit Jacolliot in Wikipedia's voice as soon as somebody points us to the actual reference. --dab (𒁳) 19:44, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

novel content
I am intrigued by this novel, and I think I'm going to read it, but so far, looking through the text, very little of the claims made in our EL seem to be substantiated. I can neither find reference to Ashoka, nor to the alleged content of the individual nine books. Perhaps this is found in Caves of terror , or in post-Mundy expansions of the saga? Citations are needed. --dab (𒁳) 20:35, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I got a kick of the version that said that Ashoka founded the secret society 10000 years ago... that would require a substantial change to established time-lines. Simonm223 (talk) 20:45, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I too could find no mention of Ashoka in Mundy's book; that well might be a MOTM embellishment. But the chapter on Once when they who keep the secrets- does have some content on secret knowledge about flying machines, propaganda etc. Howvere I am trying to avoid browsing through the book, since I want to read it end-to-end. The seventh chapter is named Shakespearean homeopathic remedy - how can anyone resist that ?! Abecedare (talk) 20:51, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll have to add it to the reading list after I finish with the other book you recommended today. Yay for the wikipedia book club! Simonm223 (talk) 20:53, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

What is this article about?
Is this about the book by Talbot Mundy or is this about the concept of Nine Unknown Men? The article is very unclear and that seams to me to be the best starting point for cleaning up this article. Padillah (talk) 17:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * You should see the old version: The Nine Unknown 04:18, 28 October 2009. The article is supposed to be about the concept of the Nine unknown men, reading through the talk page should make it more clear what the article is supposed to be. Voiceofreason01 (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

the article is about the 1923 novel, the secret society that is the central topic of interest in the novel, and the  reception of this feature in later literature. --dab (𒁳) 11:02, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Reverted to a work of fiction version.--Misarxist 09:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

This article is completely lacking without reference to the actual nine unknown men, who were Buddhist priests assigned by Emperor Ashoka to get the Ashokan Buddhist stelae properly placed around the world. While I cannot give you the references because they are not in front of me, the identities of these priests has always been a secret.

And by the way, the subjects entrusted to these nine priests, according to Morning of the Magicians, included a treatise dealing with the control of people's beliefs. I do not think that is clarified very well here.75.21.113.40 (talk) 20:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Mitra book
Since the book by Indrashish Mitra is being repeatedly added to the article, I'd like to point out that : If reliable sources that establish the books notability are available, they should be discussed here. Pinging for input. Abecedare (talk) 17:51, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * it is self-published through becoingshakespeare.com
 * the Times of India link being added is just an event announcement/ad that does not even mention the book or its link to this article's subject
 * there are obvious WP:COI and WP:PROMO concerns too.
 * thanks for looking into this. Doug Weller  talk 15:33, 30 March 2019 (UTC)