Addendum 01: Initial Memorandum
INTERNAL DIRECTIVE MEMORANDUM | SITE 72
Good morning. This is an automated memo sent out to inform you and two other personnel members (as selected via a discussion between the Paratheological Department, Antimemetics Division, and the Site-72 Dir. of Personnel) of an upcoming containment directive briefing for SCP-XXXX. Said briefing is scheduled to take place in Conference Room 72-003 at Thursday, 7:00 AM.
Further details are to be explained during this meeting. Redistribution of this information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
— Sen. Researcher Akiba Janowski
Addendum 02: Initial Briefing
CONTAINMENT DIRECTIVE BRIEFING, 05/28/2020
Main Associates:
- Paratheological Historian Madeline Breton
- Infohazard Containment Specialist Axel Morris
- Antimemetic Analysis Consultant Yves Bjerke-Petersen
- Artificial Intelligence Construct Righthand.aic
[BEGIN LOG]
[Audio recording begins. Breton, Morris, and Bjerke-Petersen are each seated across from each other, facing towards a microphone-speaker apparatus connected to Righthand.aic.]
Righthand.aic: — Right then, I think we've got the audio recording.
So! Welcome, Breton. Morris, Petersen. Thank you all for coming to this containment directive briefing for SCP-XXXX. Glad you all could come.
[Morris clears his throat.]
A. Morris: Eurgh, apologies.
Righthand.aic: No worries! Um, anyways, for this briefing we will hopefully get to answer some questions about what exactly this containment directive is expecting of you for the next week or so.
Now, attached to your packet in front of you is Internal Document XXXX-01, which should properly outline the main motivations and goals for this containment directive. Take out that page and scan it over a couple times.
M. Breton: Gotcha.
Containment Specialist A. Brockenbrough
[BEGIN LOG]
To put it lightly, I'm overwhelmed.
This is my third containment project under the Department. Third. Most of the people in my field had this kind of project at, I don't know, their twentieth. W*hy anyone of a sound mind would choose me over a hundred other, way more qualified I should add, specialists is beyond me. I suspect there's a mixup.
To be frank, I don't know where to start with this one. The information I have is, well, lacking. Just a little note I got from the higher-ups telling me what to do and a pamphlet detailing some other details about the anomaly. And apparently for safety reasons I can't even talk about the latter for too long. So there's that.
I know I gotta start somewhere. I guess I'll start by listing out some of the things I gathered from the pamphlet. Here they are:
- An artificial intelligence construct under the custody of Provisional Site-109 (Chronos.aic, it says here) was found missing sometime in 2017. Its primary task was to perform a chronological survey of the United Kingdom.
- In its place, a printed photo was located on the ground, containing no other descriptors. (That's the little stained-glass thing, I assume.)
Surprisingly, that's it. Real helpful, I know.
There's gotta be something which I can weasel out about this thing. Antimemetic, it looks like, so that's gonna be pretty tough. God knows if there's even anything I can find. I bet the antimemetic folks could sort a couple of those out for me if I wait long enough.
I'm not sure what else to put here, to be honest. Guess I'll leave it out on the record. I'll see if I can consult some historical sources about it in the meantime. Who knows, maybe Maddie has that covered for me. Seems like something zhe'd do by now.
[END LOG]
Paratheological Historian M. Breton
[BEGIN LOG]
This is, of course, an unusually difficult task, but I think I might have a lead. I'll just think out loud for a moment here.
Right now, what I'm looking at investigating is the picture provided to me (and, presumably, the rest of my coworkers). It appears to be taken from a stained-glass piece from some kind of church. Analyzing the stylistic decisions present in the picture, it seems to be from the 13th-14th century, and from somewhere in the United Kingdom, though this could just be a reproduction of said stylistic decisions. I have tried reaching out to the project heads to see if they could disclose any further information about when and where they got the picture, or even any further context other than the picture itself, but I haven't heard from any of them.
What interests me about the time frame and location is that it somewhat coincides with an earlier project I and a couple other members of the Paratheology Department were involved with a decade ago. This project, concerning a potentially antimemetic anomaly present within the English royal family succession line (the item number escapes me), might in some way be related to this. I'll excerpt a couple of the notes I took from said project here which piqued my interest.
- Anomaly concerning the history relating to the lineage of the English royal family. All currently accepted historical documentation purports an "Edward III" reigned between the years of 1327 & 1377, despite no evidence suggesting such an individual existed.
- While accomplishments supposedly achieved by "Edward III" have ample historical evidence, the existence of an individual by such of a name as an English monarch remain to be found.
- Any attempt to publicly speculate that a monarch other than "Edward III" reigned during this period have proven unsuccessful. Stating that no such evidence for his reign exists is not affected by this property, but heavily implicating that such a monarch never existing appears to be impossible.
This is speculation, of course, but the similar time frames and periods between the anomaly above and the given picture, in addition to the anomaly being at least tangentially related to religious matters, are not lost on me.
I'll write this down and see if anybody wants to pick up where I started. Hopefully something comes out of this.
[END LOG]
Antimemetic Analysis Consultant Y. Bjerke-Petersen
[BEGIN LOG]
What is typically the most useful for learning about (and handling) cases of historical annulment is to study previous similar cases. By its very nature, there is fairly little understood about the specifics of this phenomenon. However, Division researchers have managed to classify two main different types of annulment, which I will reproduce here.
For any given historical event, figure, etc., the following main types of annulment can exist:
TYPE I. The inherent existence of the subject is erased. Two variants exist of this type depending on whether this erasing includes records of the existence of the subject introduces: clean or dirty. Clean erasures (classified as TYPE I-C) erase these records in tandem with the existence of the subject; dirty erasures (classified as TYPE I-D) do not.
TYPE II. The inherent existence of the subject, along with any other object which has interacted with this subject, is erased. The two variants present in TYPE I carry over.
[END LOG]
