| Author |
Message |
| Ekatprof |
Re: Section 7
| Wind Lane wrote: |
| Ekatprof wrote: |
| parth2024 wrote: |
| I've seen many people here saying that the letter given on the last page of 1FN is about madrigals. I cannot find anything which suggests that this letter is about madrigals. Please help me out. Where did you find anything related to madrigals in this letter? |
Since the letter said thet their agents "impersonate" Cahills to "infiltrate" the four branches, we assumed that Section 7 has to be something to do with madrigals. Or else why would Section 7 be so interested in the Cahills and the 39 clues? |
Because it's a front for the Lucian branch's clue hunting ventures?
How else would a Lucian of high rank be able to tell this shadow organization that they have to take in his dimwitted brother? (Gordon Klose) |
You got a point there about Gordon. But still, why would the Section 7 agents need to "impersonate" Cahills to infiltrate the family if the agents are Lucians and are already Cahills?
 Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 12:28 am
|
 |
| Wind Lane |
Re: Section 7
| Ekatprof wrote: |
| parth2024 wrote: |
| I've seen many people here saying that the letter given on the last page of 1FN is about madrigals. I cannot find anything which suggests that this letter is about madrigals. Please help me out. Where did you find anything related to madrigals in this letter? |
Since the letter said thet their agents "impersonate" Cahills to "infiltrate" the four branches, we assumed that Section 7 has to be something to do with madrigals. Or else why would Section 7 be so interested in the Cahills and the 39 clues? |
Because it's a front for the Lucian branch's clue hunting ventures?
How else would a Lucian of high rank be able to tell this shadow organization that they have to take in his dimwitted brother? (Gordon Klose)
Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 10:34 am
|
|
| Ekatprof |
Re: Section 7
| parth2024 wrote: |
| I've seen many people here saying that the letter given on the last page of 1FN is about madrigals. I cannot find anything which suggests that this letter is about madrigals. Please help me out. Where did you find anything related to madrigals in this letter? |
Since the letter said thet their agents "impersonate" Cahills to "infiltrate" the four branches, we assumed that Section 7 has to be something to do with madrigals. Or else why would Section 7 be so interested in the Cahills and the 39 clues?
Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 5:55 am
|
|
| parth2024 |
 Section 7
I've seen many people here saying that the letter given on the last page of 1FN is about madrigals. I cannot find anything which suggests that this letter is about madrigals. Please help me out. Where did you find anything related to madrigals in this letter?
Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 1:53 am
|
|
| BEDOMII |
Hopefully of won't be a song at the end like the pellinor books
Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 1:26 am
|
|
| Sherlock_39 |
| Wind Lane wrote: |
| Sherlock_39 wrote: |
| I posted that theory on the first page of this thread. |
I've mentioned it before as well, what I was noting more was the part song, family parts connection. |
I posted before about the madrigals being a combination of all four branches and my reason was also that the meaning of madrigal is a part song.
Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:16 pm
|
|
| Wind Lane |
| Sherlock_39 wrote: |
| I posted that theory on the first page of this thread. |
I've mentioned it before as well, what I was noting more was the part song, family parts connection.
Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:14 pm
|
|
| gojanus |
Re: Random thought
| I wrote: |
I thought Madrigal sounded familiar and looked through the book The Time Machine. Those were Morlocks not Madrigals. Guess i made a wrong turn! Madrigal is a word MEANING:
| Quote: |
1.
a. A song for two or three unaccompanied voices, developed in Italy in the late 13th and early 14th centuries.
b. A short poem, often about love, suitable for being set to music.
2.
a. A polyphonic song using a vernacular text and written for four to six voices, developed in Italy in the 16th century and popular in England in the 16th and early 17th centuries.
b. A part song.
|
|
Well if developed in the 13th to 14th century, that may be when the branches started
Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 10:25 am
|
|
| Sherlock_39 |
I posted that theory on the first page of this thread.
Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:18 pm
|
|
| Wind Lane |
Re: Random thought
| gojanus wrote: |
I thought Madrigal sounded familiar and looked through the book The Time Machine. Those were Morlocks not Madrigals. Guess i made a wrong turn! Madrigal is a word MEANING:
| Quote: |
1.
a. A song for two or three unaccompanied voices, developed in Italy in the late 13th and early 14th centuries.
b. A short poem, often about love, suitable for being set to music.
2.
a. A polyphonic song using a vernacular text and written for four to six voices, developed in Italy in the 16th century and popular in England in the 16th and early 17th centuries.
b. A part song.
|
|
That 2b definition just got me to thinking - Like a four part song? What if the Madrigals are what the direct line of Cahills are called? The part of the family that aren't a family branch, but the trunk of the family tree?
Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:08 pm
|
|
| gojanus |
Random thought
I thought Madrigal sounded familiar and looked through the book The Time Machine. Those were Morlocks not Madrigals. Guess i made a wrong turn! Madrigal is a word MEANING:
| Quote: |
1.
a. A song for two or three unaccompanied voices, developed in Italy in the late 13th and early 14th centuries.
b. A short poem, often about love, suitable for being set to music.
2.
a. A polyphonic song using a vernacular text and written for four to six voices, developed in Italy in the 16th century and popular in England in the 16th and early 17th centuries.
b. A part song.
|
Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 4:55 pm
|
|
| sapagoo |
Re: Frank Butler: madrigal?
| BEDOMII wrote: |
| Sherlock_39 wrote: |
| Has anyone noticed this? In the link for card 72, it's the code for the madrigals. It says keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. In the i like useless facts for annie oakley, when it says she got married to Frank Butler, the person who writes in red (the person who sort of knows about the cahills) says the same thing, as if it was a secret reason for marrying her. I'm pretty sure that means he's a madrigal. |
u really chose your charicter name well ! i can't see anything. where is it?  |
http://www.the39clues.com/cahillweb/article/72-prestige is the code book of the Madrigals. Prestige rule # 1 is Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
The Annie Oakley article on the web is http://www.the39clues.com/cahillweb/article/i-like-useless-facts-annie-oakley
it has the phrase "You know that saying about keeping your friends close and your enemies closer? "
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:33 pm
|
|
| BEDOMII |
Re: Frank Butler: madrigal?
| Sherlock_39 wrote: |
| Has anyone noticed this? In the link for card 72, it's the code for the madrigals. It says keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. In the i like useless facts for annie oakley, when it says she got married to Frank Butler, the person who writes in red (the person who sort of knows about the cahills) says the same thing, as if it was a secret reason for marrying her. I'm pretty sure that means he's a madrigal. |
u really chose your charicter name well ! i can't see anything. where is it?
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 11:27 am
|
|
| Sherlock_39 |
Frank Butler: madrigal?
Has anyone noticed this? In the link for card 72, it's the code for the madrigals. It says keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. In the i like useless facts for annie oakley, when it says she got married to Frank Butler, the person who writes in red (the person who sort of knows about the cahills) says the same thing, as if it was a secret reason for marrying her. I'm pretty sure that means he's a madrigal.
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:08 pm
|
|
| sdaytime |
| Sherlock_39 wrote: |
| Ekatprof wrote: |
| Sherlock_39 wrote: |
| Maybe over the years the madrigals forgot that they were descendants of the cahills but only thought of themselves as guardians. Maybe their idea of guarding the secret is infiltrating the branches and stopping them from finding the clues. |
Very good theory Sherlock. Thing is, why arent the madrigals looking for the clues themselves. They could be infiltrating the branches and stopping them from finding the clues so that the Madrigals can get to the "ultimate power" first.
Ultimate power can be very attractive.... |
But if the madrigals had the power, there would be no hunt, book series, or most importantly, money for Scholastic.  |
That is something to think about.
But really, I think the reason they won't take it themselves ( assuming they are some type of guardians) is that they realize that no person deserves this "great power", or people would misuse it.
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 7:25 pm
|
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|