"And the Romans built a Temple1
in the valley of the Sals"
Satelite image showing the area of Rennes-les-Bains/Fangalots/valley of the Sals
Boudet makes reference to a pagan temple at the very end of his book The True Celtic Language and the Cromleck of Rennes-les-Bains. In the Chapter called: LES ROMAINS ET LA SOURCE THERMALE DE LA REINE Boudet writes;
"We have seen the explanations of the Celtic monuments of the Redones of southern Gaul, and what were the religious beliefs of the Celts. When foreigners, under the veil of commerce and alliance, invaded Gaul, these Gallic beliefs began to weaken in the minds of the population. The chiefs of the various tribes, in freeing themselves from the supreme authority of Neimheid, let the decay set in, and when the nation, defeated by Caesar, became part of the Roman Empire, the ancient and pure religious beliefs taught by Druids, gave way to the idolatrous worship spread by the victors. The temples of the false gods have defiled your Celtic land, and the people humbled and perverted to worship Teutates, Belenus and Ogmius or Oghan. We can not bring ourselves to study the names of these false gods and idolatrous beliefs [of these] degenerate Gauls. The abyss in which they were trained is too horrible for us to dwell on or probe.
At the miserable time that preceded the arrival of the necessary and immediate Saviour awaited by the nations, the true religious meaning of the Cromleck disappears under all the memories. The southern countries of the Redones had long been part of the Province, and the Romans had built a temple in the valley of the Sals, and baths at the source de la Reine. A new village was built on the plateau of Villanova, overlooking the spa's north-east side.
The Romans left many traces of their extended stay in the Cromleck, medals and coins of gold, silver and bronze, from the triumvirate of Antony, Octavian and Lepidus, until the reign of the Emperor Gratian, whole amphorae, broken statues carved in white marble, capitals and bases of columns and carved inscriptions in stone2.
The Southern Redones spent a relatively short time in the foolish superstitions of paganism. The proconsul Sergius Paulus3, a disciple of the apostle St Paul came to bring the Gospel to the south of Gaul and had established his headquarters in Narbonne. Christian missionaries sent by the illustrious and holy Bishop to conquer the truth, the hearts and minds of the Gauls of Narbonne, understood, when entering the Cromleck of Redones, the respect with which they [were] surrounded - the stones that had been cut or removed, a respect [which soon] became idolatrous, and they burnt the Greek crosses on all points of the circle of stones at the entrance to the Cromleck, other crosses, at Roukats, at Serbaïrou on the crest of the Pla de la Coste et
de las Brugos, Cugulhou.
So, on the edge of the cap dé l'Hommé on the top of a Menhir, opposite the pagan temple, converted into a Christian church later destroyed by fire, was carved a beautiful head of the Saviour looking over the valley, over all the dominant Celtic monuments which had lost their teachings. The victorious cross against paganism, has not
ceased to reign in the Cromleck of Rennes-les-Bains, and still maintains, engraved in the religious heart of its inhabitants, the commandments of life given to the world by the Eternal Truth".
There is some confusion over the assertions made here by Boudet about this Temple and its location as well as later muddying of the waters by Pierre Plantard and Philippe de Cherisey which served to cause further confusion. Take a look at these diagrams illustrated below:
These illustrations are from the work of Sacaze - a work which was richly looted in the drafting of the apocryphal text attributed to Eugène Stublein as the Gravées Pierre du Languedoc. The above stone is a fragment of a marble inscription found at Rennes-les-Bains. On the right is the Eugène Stublein work - the Gravées Pierre du Languedoc & we can see that the 'Priory' copyist has hand drawn a copy of the above stone while adding
|
|
further detail such as the stone being found at the CROIX DE CER[CLE] at Rennes-les-Bains4. The copyist has also added the right hand column of the inscription (i do not know whether this is correct or not). The copyist added that this marble column found at the Croix de Cercle in Rennes-les-Bains was later given to/deposited with Monsieur Cailhol of Alet.
Research carried out by Peter O'Reilly (Rennes Observer April 2005) confirms that this Monsieur Cailhol of Alet indeed knew Henri Boudet, and was perhaps an intermediary for him. And in fact in "Mémoires de l'Académie royale des sciences, inscriptions et belles-lettres de Toulouse", 1877 (SER7,T9): we find the following entry:
"MEDAILLE D’ARGENT DE RE CLASSE. M Cailhol, à Toulouse (Collection de fossiles)."
[Silver medal, first class. M. Cailhol, Toulouse (Collection of fossils).]
"M. Cailhol, avocat à Toulouse, a profité d’un séjour de quatre mois à Rennes-les-Bains pour recueillir les fossiles de cette station bien connue des géologues. [...] M. Cailhol se propose d’augmenter encore cette année sa belle collection et de faire une étude suivie de la région qu’il a si heureusement explorée."
[“M. Cailhol, a barrister (attorney) in Toulouse, has made the most of a four month stay at Rennes-les-Bains to collect fossils from this resort that is well-known to geologists. [...] M. Cailhol intends to increase his collection again this year and to make a sustained study of this region that he has investigated so successfully.”]
Monsieur Cailhol, a possible friend of Henri Boudet, collecting fossils and stones in the area of Rennes-les-Bains is also mixed up with another bizarre stone given to him. This is the now famous 'Head of the Saviour'.
CAILHOL is alleged to have taken posession of the 'Head of the Saviour' according to Boudet in his 'La Vrai Langue Celtique' - where he writes; "[towards] the spa and the parish church, are the curve made by the foundation rocks carrying the name "Cap de l'homme’ .... A menhir was kept [preserved] at this place and it was on its top, that a carved relief of a magnificent head of the Lord Jesus the Saviour of mankind was found. This statue which saw nearly 18 centuries has given to this part of the plateau the name ‘Cap de l’homme’ (head man: man par excellence, filius hominis). It is deplorable that we have been obliged, in the month of December 1884 to remove the beautiful sculpture of the place - it was to save it from the ravages produced by the pick-axe of an unfortunate young man, who was far from suspecting its meaning and value. (To note: "This carved head of Christ is in the hands of Mr. CAILHOL Alet)5.
Does it seem odd that this Monsieur Cailhol is in posession of two bizarre stones as given to him by Boudet?
U. Gibert and G. Rancoule discuss this 'Head of the Saviour'. (See here). They say that the
"sculptured head,....is currently sealed in the presbytery of Rennes les Bains". It seems this head was one of two, and that the two have been completely confused with each other. The authors say:
"Even taking into account the fragility of human testimony after such a period, it seems likely that we are dealing with two different heads:
Year of discovery 1884 and 1898 , an interval of 14 years - One head male, the other female. Head fixed on top of a rock, the other a block. First head went to Mr. CAILHOL, the second head was sealed in the wall of the presbytery by the mason MARTIN.
But the location of the finds are the same: the rock called "Cap de l’homme’ on the boundary and along the Pla de la Côte or Bruyères. We have checked that the sandstones forming the rocks of the Pla are similar to that of the head. It seems reasonable to conclude positively. The problem of the "menhir’ is simple to solve: we have long seen on the grounds that, if descriptions of the sites by Abbé Boudet are good and accurate, his conclusions as a Celtic linguist's scholar (as we heard a century ago) are unfortunately the highest mark of fantasy, as may be seen easily by browsing his book. His theory of pre or proto-historic civilisations building these "menhirs, dolmens, stone circles" as described and plotted on a map [which are also geographically correct], are unfounded. We have seen that in all cases it is because of erosion. It can be said of the menhirs, dolmens, stone circles that we have seen are due to similar causes".
We know that the authors concluded: "The sculpture had been made on the side or top
of a rocky outcrop. Given the large number of those below the place called "Cap de l’homme’ and their sheer volumes, it has not been possible to identify the exact place from where the block was extracted, if indeed it could still be visible after three quarters of a century".
Some researchers have suggested that Boudet was referring to a Cap de l'Homme - just not the one at Rennes-les-Bains. Might this explain why Gibert and Rancoule cannot really identify the 'exact place' from where the head was extracted in the area of Rennes-les-Bains?
This 'Head of the Saviour' is later mixed by the Priory mystifiers with the 'Head of Dagobert' - also illustrated in the unobtainable Eugène Stublein Gravées Pierre du Languedoc.
Research carried out by Peter O'Reilly (Rennes Observer April 2005) confirms that this Monsieur Cailhol of Alet indeed knew Henri Boudet, and was perhaps an intermediary for him. And in fact in "Mémoires de l'Académie royale des sciences, inscriptions et belles-lettres de Toulouse", 1877 (SER7,T9): we find the following entry:
"MEDAILLE D’ARGENT DE RE CLASSE. M Cailhol, à Toulouse (Collection de fossiles)."
[Silver medal, first class. M. Cailhol, Toulouse (Collection of fossils).]
"M. Cailhol, avocat à Toulouse, a profité d’un séjour de quatre mois à Rennes-les-Bains pour recueillir les fossiles de cette station bien connue des géologues. [...] M. Cailhol se propose d’augmenter encore cette année sa belle collection et de faire une étude suivie de la région qu’il a si heureusement explorée."
[“M. Cailhol, a barrister (attorney) in Toulouse, has made the most of a four month stay at Rennes-les-Bains to collect fossils from this resort that is well-known to geologists. [...] M. Cailhol intends to increase his collection again this year and to make a sustained study of this region that he has investigated so successfully.”]
Monsieur Cailhol, a possible friend of Henri Boudet, collecting fossils and stones in the area of Rennes-les-Bains is also mixed up with another bizarre stone given to him. This is the now famous 'Head of the Saviour'.
CAILHOL is alleged to have taken posession of the 'Head of the Saviour' according to Boudet in his 'La Vrai Langue Celtique' - where he writes; "[towards] the spa and the parish church, are the curve made by the foundation rocks carrying the name "Cap de l'homme’ .... A menhir was kept [preserved] at this place and it was on its top, that a carved relief of a magnificent head of the Lord Jesus the Saviour of mankind was found. This statue which saw nearly 18 centuries has given to this part of the plateau the name ‘Cap de l’homme’ (head man: man par excellence, filius hominis). It is deplorable that we have been obliged, in the month of December 1884 to remove the beautiful sculpture of the place - it was to save it from the ravages produced by the pick-axe of an unfortunate young man, who was far from suspecting its meaning and value. (To note: "This carved head of Christ is in the hands of Mr. CAILHOL Alet)5.
Does it seem odd that this Monsieur Cailhol is in posession of two bizarre stones as given to him by Boudet?
U. Gibert and G. Rancoule discuss this 'Head of the Saviour'. (See here). They say that the
"sculptured head,....is currently sealed in the presbytery of Rennes les Bains". It seems this head was one of two, and that the two have been completely confused with each other. The authors say:
"Even taking into account the fragility of human testimony after such a period, it seems likely that we are dealing with two different heads:
Year of discovery 1884 and 1898 , an interval of 14 years - One head male, the other female. Head fixed on top of a rock, the other a block. First head went to Mr. CAILHOL, the second head was sealed in the wall of the presbytery by the mason MARTIN.
But the location of the finds are the same: the rock called "Cap de l’homme’ on the boundary and along the Pla de la Côte or Bruyères. We have checked that the sandstones forming the rocks of the Pla are similar to that of the head. It seems reasonable to conclude positively. The problem of the "menhir’ is simple to solve: we have long seen on the grounds that, if descriptions of the sites by Abbé Boudet are good and accurate, his conclusions as a Celtic linguist's scholar (as we heard a century ago) are unfortunately the highest mark of fantasy, as may be seen easily by browsing his book. His theory of pre or proto-historic civilisations building these "menhirs, dolmens, stone circles" as described and plotted on a map [which are also geographically correct], are unfounded. We have seen that in all cases it is because of erosion. It can be said of the menhirs, dolmens, stone circles that we have seen are due to similar causes".
We know that the authors concluded: "The sculpture had been made on the side or top
of a rocky outcrop. Given the large number of those below the place called "Cap de l’homme’ and their sheer volumes, it has not been possible to identify the exact place from where the block was extracted, if indeed it could still be visible after three quarters of a century".
Some researchers have suggested that Boudet was referring to a Cap de l'Homme - just not the one at Rennes-les-Bains. Might this explain why Gibert and Rancoule cannot really identify the 'exact place' from where the head was extracted in the area of Rennes-les-Bains?
This 'Head of the Saviour' is later mixed by the Priory mystifiers with the 'Head of Dagobert' - also illustrated in the unobtainable Eugène Stublein Gravées Pierre du Languedoc.
|
If we look closely at the illustration (see left) - the Priory 'jokers' have added to this 'Head' further information, such as it was engraved in 700AD (?) and that it was to be found on a menhir situated on Pla. de las Brugos. This Pla. de les Brugos is mentioned by Boudet in 'La Vrai Langue Celtique', where he says: Christian missionaries sent by the illustrious and holy Bishop .....understood, when entering the Cromleck of the Redones, the respect with which they [were] surrounded - the stones that had been cut or removed, a respect [which soon] became idolatrous, and they burnt the Greek crosses on all points of the circle of stones at the entrance to the Cromleck, other crosses, at Roukats, at Serbaïrou on the crest of the Pla de la Coste et de las Brugos, Cugulhou".
At the end of his book, Boudet returns to this standing stone, stating it was part of a pagan temple, which was converted into a Christian church, and which was later destroyed by a fire. He adds how the head looked out over the valley, “and dominated all of these Celtic monuments that have lost their teachings”. |
No doubt, for Boudet, the head was thus carved to underline that Rennes-les-Bains was now “watched over” by Jesus, and no longer by the pagan gods once worshipped there.
But again all is not as it seems. When did Rennes-les-Bains ever have a 'Head of the Saviour' which was part of or associated with a pagan Temple, later converted into a church and then destroyed by fire? As far as i know - there is no historically attested pagan Temple found at Rennes-les-Bains although it would be within the realms of possibility given the Roman history of the village. Some researchers in fact have asserted that the 'Head' actually came from within the Temple, or was akin to the many archaeological sculptures found adorning grave stones and cemeteries (there are thousands of examples of this in Narbonne). However, this is not what Boudet says. Boudet says the 'Head of the Saviour' was carved and 'looked out over the valley'.
A well known 18th century amateur historian does mention a 'temple' - and looking into this may help us to slot the pieces into place.
The amateur historian is one Rev. Delmas, who had provided a brief reconstruction of life in the village of Rennes-les-Bains during the Roman period in a private manuscript he wrote, which ends with a long list of characters portrayed on ancient coins found in the area. Among some of the most important archaeological finds from the village that Delmas is at pains to discuss is a small stone that contains an inscription which has been variously interpreted through the years.
This stone is the focus of Plantard and de Cherisey in quite bizarre ways.
The 'stone' seems to have been first mentioned in the seventeenth century by Guillaume Catel (1560-1626). Catel says the stone was at Rennes-les-Bains, in the village church but does not say how long the 'stone' had been there or how it came to be in the church at Rennes-les-Bains. He wrote;
'And seen in the church of the place mentioned, les Bains de Rennes, an ancient Roman inscription, recovered from ancient foundations near the source, C. POMPEIVS QVARTVS PAM SVO.'
But another historian, Louis Fédié, also got confused regarding the origins of this stone. In 'LE COMTE DE RAZES et le DIOCESE D'ALET - Notices historiques' - Fédié wrote
"On the other hand, no monument, no civil or religious edifice of Roman origin has been found at Alet, which is likely to have been an ancient oppidum which was transformed into a simple town. It was believed that one could find at Alet the remains of an ancient temple of Diana on the site occupied by the ruins of the old cathedral of Sainte-Marie, but there is no evidence that this assertion can be based on. We wanted to relate the existence of this pagan temple from the discovery of a pillar or votive altar found at Alet, and that bears the following inscription;
MATRI DEUM
CN POMP. PROBUS
CURATOR TEMPLI. VSLM
We would note that there is a great similarity between this inscription and the one that appears on a sandstone plaque which was discovered at Bains de Rennes, more than a century ago, in a piece of old wall surrounding the source of the Reine.
C.POMPEIUS QUARTUS.
P. AMSVO.
The near identical aspects of these two inscriptions leads us to believe that they are the work of the same character, Gnaeus Pompeius, and that he was simultaneously a farmer(?) at the baths of Rennes and spas of Alet. On the other hand, we know that the Romans used to create, close to all the resorts, a small temple, often even a simple sacellum, dedicated to the goddess Hygeia or Thermona, a nymph who presided over the mineral waters".
So here, Fédié is linking the existence of a pagan temple at Alet, using a stone found at Rennes-les-Bains [the Pompeius Quartus stone] as well as one at Alet [the Matri Deum stone]. Perhaps this is the source of later confusions between stones and Temples in Rennes-les-Bains and Alet? In fact, Fédié seems to goes on to suggest that a citizen, Gnaeus Pompeius, was simultaneously a villager of Rennes-les-Bains and also of Alet where he carved these stones, or even that he was a villager of Rennes-les-Bains as well as curate of a Temple at Alet!
Another historian writing about the Matri Deum stone said that this stone was associated with:
'The temple of Alet - ..... a special sanctuary and [as] we have seen this happen before with places such as Moux placed under the direction of a master (magistri) of the pagus (i.e. the local country). Cicero tells us that Curators filled the job of curating in the Temple of Earth 'aedes Telluris is curationis meae'. A religion native to Phrygia, taurobolic worship of Cybele, and the Magna Mater Deum 'was introduced, in very great honor to the Lyonnaise, and the Narbonaise and Aquitaine itself. After a fierce struggle, which lasted over a hundred years, this Magna Mater religion finally 'succumbed - under the Christian assualt & the Temples of the Mother of the Gods were ruined. Thereafter there arose often, as in the vicus Alet, shrines dedicated to Notre Dame. It is also to be noted - this same struggle applies at least to a whole chain of places along the Pyrenees - Our Lady and St. Peter have generally taken the place of local deities of foreign import'.
Doesnt this rather read like that which was suggested by Boudet? Remember Boudet had written that:
"We have seen the explanations of the Celtic monuments of the Redones of southern Gaul, and what were the religious beliefs of the Celts. When foreigners, under the veil of commerce and alliance, invaded Gaul, these Gallic beliefs began to weaken in the minds of the population. The chiefs of the various tribes, in freeing themselves from the supreme authority of Neimheid, let the decay set in, and when the nation, defeated by Caesar, became part of the Roman Empire, the ancient and pure religious beliefs taught by Druids, gave way to the idolatrous worship spread by the victors. The temples of the false gods have defiled your Celtic land, and the people humbled and perverted to worship Teutates, Belenus and Ogmius or Oghan".
Boudet's 'foreigners' were the Roman armies who invaded Gaul and assimilated the indigenous religion into the Roman state religions and built new Temples. Thats why Boudet tells us that the Romans built a temple in the valley of the Sals! It was this new Temple which had earlier connections with a pagan temple perhaps identified by the 'Head of the Saviour'.
Later, it would be the Christian 'foreigners' who would supplant the Roman religions, and that is how a Roman Temple of some importance was set fire to. This all sounds like real events. But where is the evidence that this happened in Rennes-les-Bains? Simply put, there is none!
It is the strangest enigma. Why is Boudet preoccupied with a pagan Temple which was later a Christian church? One associated with the 'Head of the Saviour'? One which was 'set fire to'?
Once again though, from the writings of Philippe de Cherisey, maybe we can glimpse part of this enigmatic story Boudet was trying to tell us about. On p111 of his novel Cicuit, Cherisey tells us that
'.... the fortress of the king is in the territory of 16 to 18 hectares indicated by the cadastre [map] under the appellation 'rokko negro'. The centre of Rennes and the pierre du pain are this fortress which is found in the sign of Pisces (poisson/fish) - the treasure that is there is multiple in nature, such as precious stones by the Visigoths of the fifth century, gold and manuscripts by the Arabs who deposited [them in?] the tomb of Grand Roman between 711 and 715. I will add that the personality of the great Roman is not absolutely certain, the general thought was that it was Pompey (i.e. this is what Plantard advocated), but there is also... gerard de nerval, which would lean rather to the Emperor Nerva. This distinction between the two zones of treasure is both fundamental and related to the work of Saunière, who transferred to the fortress what was in the basement(?), but anyone that hasnt experienced the second will not know the first"6.
A little further on Critias [one of the novel's many characters] tells us that;
"on the left bank of the sals, beyond the cemetery, after the main square and the church. Here stood a pagan temple ... fifteen meters high which was set fire to (by?) Charles Martel in the year 737 during his attempted invasion of Languedoc. Also the statue of Isis that comes with the other relics - a head of Mercury and an arm Jupiter holding a cloth, a hand holding an egg. This information comes from the memories of Abbe Delmas - Who, having been responsible for a flow of ink, was also responsible for the flow of even more saliva!"
Here we can see that we return full circle back to Abbe Delmas. We can see Boudet's Cromlech is associated with various treasures - including one deposited by the Arabs in the tomb of the Grand Roman between 711 and 715 AD. [The Grand Roman epitaph has a link with the earlier Pompeius stone cited above as Plantard and Cherisey asserted that this stone came from, or helped locate, the tomb of the Grand Roman]. We see that the pagan Temple, for the Priory copyist was indicated by the head of Dagobert, but the same Temple was, for Boudet indicated by the Head of the Saviour, [and which was linked to his Cromlech]. This Temple, as we have seen above, had been converted to a Christian church but according to the Priory and also Boudet, was burnt down in the year 719AD or 737AD during the invasion by the Muslims or even Charles Martel of the Languedoc. And the Arabs - who fit the time span - were said to be previously aware of this Temple because they added gold and manuscripts to it - and Cherisey referred to this as the tomb of the Grand Roman!
In amongst this confused data, and to some, just ridiculous child's play and irrelevancies there is only one town that fits all these scenarios. It is indeed the village of Alet-les-Bains in Southern France. We see that the clues had been given to us throughout the obfuscation - when the object of that obfuscation had been the hiding of the intended meaning, making communication confusing, willfully ambiguous, and harder to interpret. The signposts were there though - that of Monsieur Cailhol of Alet, his mysterious heads, the Pompeius stone and the work of Boudet etc.
This is what Fedie has to say about Alet: We summarize our views on this phase of the historical existence of Alet as follows: the Romans, having, as they usually did, adopted, and changed the name of Alektha to Aletha, created in the locality a military station and a beach resort with the addition of a small religious building, and other special kinds of public institutions. Under their rule, the Gallo-Celtic oppidum did not increase and it remained important that the Romans called Alet a villaria - a village.
We know that when the Romans left it was the Visigoths who became the overlords of Septimania in which Alet stood.
However - "The year is 719 - Muslim settlers entered the Iberian Peninsula only seven years ago; they are now laying the foundations of a civilization that will endure for almost 800 years (See Aramco World , January-February 1993). Muslim armies, bolstered by recently-arrived troops from northern and southern Arabia - "Syrians" and "Yemenis" - cross the Pyrenees, probing deep into what they call "the Great Land," al-Ard al-Kabirah. They quickly capture most of Visigothic Septimania, including the once-great Roman centre of Narbonne, known in Arabic as Arbuna. The inhabitants of the city, mostly Arian Christians, are given honorable terms and allowed complete religious freedom by a treaty that resembles one granted to the Spanish Visigoth Theudemia of Murcia. The two documents together show that the Arabs had a very definite settlement policy in mind for the Visigothic possessions of Occitania - southern France - on the other side of the Pyrenees, with more generous and far-sighted conditions than were current in intra-European struggles. With Narbonne and its port secure, al-Samh ibn Malik, governor-general of al-Andalus, moved swiftly to subdue the surrounding area, taking Alet, south of Carcassonne, and Béziers, Agde, Lodève, Maguelonne (Montpellier) and Nîmes in fairly quick succession. By 721, he was ready for a new, decisive and far-reaching campaign" (http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issue/199302/the.arabs.in.occitania.htm).
So here we have a solid historical reference on the capture of the village of Alet by a Muslim Army. The year is around 719AD.
"After some initial success leading a large Arab army into Visigothic Septimania and besieging a number of towns and cities including Narbonne, Béziers, Agde, Lodève, Maguelonne (Montpellier) and Nîmes, al-Samh ibn Malik returned to Muslim Iberia to gather more Muslim fighters prior to attacking the strongly defended Aquitanian capital city of Toulouse. He returned to Septimania and on to southeastern Aquitaine with a massive army, siege engines, infantry, horsemen and mercenaries. The siege of Toulouse, with its near-impregnable walls, lasted until early summer. The defenders, short of provisions, were close to breaking when, around June 9, 721, Eudes the Great, the duke of Aquitaine, returned at the head of a large Aquitanian and Frankish force, attacking al-Samh's rear and launching a highly successful encircling movement. A major, decisive battle ensued. Caught between the Toulouse defenders and Eudes's men, al-Samh tried to break out, but was trapped with the bulk of his troops in a place that came to be called by Muslim chroniclers Balat al Shuhada ('the path of the martyrs') where he made a determined last stand as his army was decimated by the Christian forces. Al-Samh himself was critically wounded and died shortly afterwards". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Samh_ibn_Malik_al-Khawlani).
Charles Martel is also related to these events.
"The Battle of Toulouse (721) was a victory of an Aquitanian Christian army led by Duke Odo of Aquitaine over an Umayyad Muslim army besieging the city of Toulouse, and led by the governor of Al-Andalus, Al-Samh ibn Malik al-Khawlani. The victory checked the spread of Umayyad control westward from Narbonne into Aquitaine. Toulouse, was then Aquitaine's most important city, and Duke Odo of Aquitaine, also known as Eudes, immediately left to find help when war was near. He asked for the assistance of Charles Martel, who in turn preferred to wait and see rather than help his southern rival. Odo returned three months later—just as the city was about to surrender—and attacked the Muslim invaders on June 9. The victory was essentially the result of a classic enveloping movement by Odo. After Odo originally fled, the Muslims became overconfident, and instead of maintaining strong outer defenses around their siege camp, and continuously scouting, did neither. Thus, when Odo returned, he was able to launch an almost totally surprise attack on the siege force, scattering it with the first attack, and slaughtering units that were resting or fled without weapons or armour. Odo appealed to the Franks for assistance again, which Charles Martel only granted after he agreed to submit to Frankish authority. Some historians believe that the Battle of Toulouse halted the Muslim conquest of Europe even more than the later—and more celebrated—Battle of Tours (October 10, 732, between Tours and Poitiers), but this is highly problematic: for even had the Arabs won at Toulouse, they still would have had to conquer the Franks to retain control of the region. However, nearly all historians agree that the Christian victory at Toulouse was important in a macrohistorical sense: it gave Charles Martel badly needed time to strengthen his grip on power and build the veteran army which stood him in such good stead eleven years later at Tours"( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Toulouse_(721)
So is this pagan Temple that Boudet refers to really the one at Alet? Maybe so. It may also be significant about the 'beautiful head of the Saviour' which Boudet says is in the posession of Mr. Cailhol of Alet (for more on this see http://www.rhedesium.com/rennes-les-bains-note-on-a-carved-head-by-unbspgibert-and-gnbsprancoule.html). Bizarrely Alet has its own Saviour (St Salvayre church) and also some kind of worship of a Head. The site of Saint Salvayre has a place called the "dead man", a place beyond the merely symbolic, and it can be assumed that the eight carved heads on the church guard it. Intriguingly there was a ninth head, "the head of
the Saviour," which was the subject of an annual procession for the inhabitants
of Alet (http://desorchideesetdesorties.20minutes-blogs.fr/archive/2010/01/29/enigme-a-saint-salvayre-escale-sur-le-chemin-des-menhirs.html).
Uncannily similar to Boudet? We think so. And so do others.
For example, Pierre Silvain said:
" The ancient church of Saint Salvayre having burned before being moved (it was the "rock of the eagle"), we believe that it is described by Boudet at the end of a coded book. This means that through WORDS defined in the book and by using descriptions of locations in an arbitrary Cromleck and virtual one (at RLB), Boudet actually refers to places situated beyond, in a larger circle and which was fully understood by Hivert & Murat in "The Key of the Golden Secret of Rennes-le-Château" on page 97 viz: "Another form of relationship in the microcosm-macrocosm is seeing a similar, smaller or larger, than the original picture. This aspect is suggested to us by Boudet in his vision of a small Cromleck contained in a larger (p. 244), and containing a small circle within a larger (p. 246). The vision of a small Cromleck in the site of Rennes-les-Bains is not satisfactory, we have naturally to 'see' the opposite approach, consisting of seeing the Cromleck of Rennes-les-Bains in another or on a larger scale."
Following this therefore, the place called "Dead Man" of RLB becomes the "Dead Man" of Saint Salvayre, and the menhir not located by Boudet (there are only two!) is that of Saint Salvayre, the hole sealing the menhir of Saint Salvayre is not that of a cross as assumed Dr. Boyer, but the head of the Savior quoted by Boudet, which would have the merit of explaining the name of the hamlet, "Salvayre" meaning "Savior"! Note that the menhir of Saint Salvayre is located exactly on a ridge (= edge) and totally dominates the valley, and the head of the Saviour is just as Boudet (p.234) described it and "in the hands of Mr. Cailhol at Alet " closest to Saint Salvayre village".
But again all is not as it seems. When did Rennes-les-Bains ever have a 'Head of the Saviour' which was part of or associated with a pagan Temple, later converted into a church and then destroyed by fire? As far as i know - there is no historically attested pagan Temple found at Rennes-les-Bains although it would be within the realms of possibility given the Roman history of the village. Some researchers in fact have asserted that the 'Head' actually came from within the Temple, or was akin to the many archaeological sculptures found adorning grave stones and cemeteries (there are thousands of examples of this in Narbonne). However, this is not what Boudet says. Boudet says the 'Head of the Saviour' was carved and 'looked out over the valley'.
A well known 18th century amateur historian does mention a 'temple' - and looking into this may help us to slot the pieces into place.
The amateur historian is one Rev. Delmas, who had provided a brief reconstruction of life in the village of Rennes-les-Bains during the Roman period in a private manuscript he wrote, which ends with a long list of characters portrayed on ancient coins found in the area. Among some of the most important archaeological finds from the village that Delmas is at pains to discuss is a small stone that contains an inscription which has been variously interpreted through the years.
This stone is the focus of Plantard and de Cherisey in quite bizarre ways.
The 'stone' seems to have been first mentioned in the seventeenth century by Guillaume Catel (1560-1626). Catel says the stone was at Rennes-les-Bains, in the village church but does not say how long the 'stone' had been there or how it came to be in the church at Rennes-les-Bains. He wrote;
'And seen in the church of the place mentioned, les Bains de Rennes, an ancient Roman inscription, recovered from ancient foundations near the source, C. POMPEIVS QVARTVS PAM SVO.'
But another historian, Louis Fédié, also got confused regarding the origins of this stone. In 'LE COMTE DE RAZES et le DIOCESE D'ALET - Notices historiques' - Fédié wrote
"On the other hand, no monument, no civil or religious edifice of Roman origin has been found at Alet, which is likely to have been an ancient oppidum which was transformed into a simple town. It was believed that one could find at Alet the remains of an ancient temple of Diana on the site occupied by the ruins of the old cathedral of Sainte-Marie, but there is no evidence that this assertion can be based on. We wanted to relate the existence of this pagan temple from the discovery of a pillar or votive altar found at Alet, and that bears the following inscription;
MATRI DEUM
CN POMP. PROBUS
CURATOR TEMPLI. VSLM
We would note that there is a great similarity between this inscription and the one that appears on a sandstone plaque which was discovered at Bains de Rennes, more than a century ago, in a piece of old wall surrounding the source of the Reine.
C.POMPEIUS QUARTUS.
P. AMSVO.
The near identical aspects of these two inscriptions leads us to believe that they are the work of the same character, Gnaeus Pompeius, and that he was simultaneously a farmer(?) at the baths of Rennes and spas of Alet. On the other hand, we know that the Romans used to create, close to all the resorts, a small temple, often even a simple sacellum, dedicated to the goddess Hygeia or Thermona, a nymph who presided over the mineral waters".
So here, Fédié is linking the existence of a pagan temple at Alet, using a stone found at Rennes-les-Bains [the Pompeius Quartus stone] as well as one at Alet [the Matri Deum stone]. Perhaps this is the source of later confusions between stones and Temples in Rennes-les-Bains and Alet? In fact, Fédié seems to goes on to suggest that a citizen, Gnaeus Pompeius, was simultaneously a villager of Rennes-les-Bains and also of Alet where he carved these stones, or even that he was a villager of Rennes-les-Bains as well as curate of a Temple at Alet!
Another historian writing about the Matri Deum stone said that this stone was associated with:
'The temple of Alet - ..... a special sanctuary and [as] we have seen this happen before with places such as Moux placed under the direction of a master (magistri) of the pagus (i.e. the local country). Cicero tells us that Curators filled the job of curating in the Temple of Earth 'aedes Telluris is curationis meae'. A religion native to Phrygia, taurobolic worship of Cybele, and the Magna Mater Deum 'was introduced, in very great honor to the Lyonnaise, and the Narbonaise and Aquitaine itself. After a fierce struggle, which lasted over a hundred years, this Magna Mater religion finally 'succumbed - under the Christian assualt & the Temples of the Mother of the Gods were ruined. Thereafter there arose often, as in the vicus Alet, shrines dedicated to Notre Dame. It is also to be noted - this same struggle applies at least to a whole chain of places along the Pyrenees - Our Lady and St. Peter have generally taken the place of local deities of foreign import'.
Doesnt this rather read like that which was suggested by Boudet? Remember Boudet had written that:
"We have seen the explanations of the Celtic monuments of the Redones of southern Gaul, and what were the religious beliefs of the Celts. When foreigners, under the veil of commerce and alliance, invaded Gaul, these Gallic beliefs began to weaken in the minds of the population. The chiefs of the various tribes, in freeing themselves from the supreme authority of Neimheid, let the decay set in, and when the nation, defeated by Caesar, became part of the Roman Empire, the ancient and pure religious beliefs taught by Druids, gave way to the idolatrous worship spread by the victors. The temples of the false gods have defiled your Celtic land, and the people humbled and perverted to worship Teutates, Belenus and Ogmius or Oghan".
Boudet's 'foreigners' were the Roman armies who invaded Gaul and assimilated the indigenous religion into the Roman state religions and built new Temples. Thats why Boudet tells us that the Romans built a temple in the valley of the Sals! It was this new Temple which had earlier connections with a pagan temple perhaps identified by the 'Head of the Saviour'.
Later, it would be the Christian 'foreigners' who would supplant the Roman religions, and that is how a Roman Temple of some importance was set fire to. This all sounds like real events. But where is the evidence that this happened in Rennes-les-Bains? Simply put, there is none!
It is the strangest enigma. Why is Boudet preoccupied with a pagan Temple which was later a Christian church? One associated with the 'Head of the Saviour'? One which was 'set fire to'?
Once again though, from the writings of Philippe de Cherisey, maybe we can glimpse part of this enigmatic story Boudet was trying to tell us about. On p111 of his novel Cicuit, Cherisey tells us that
'.... the fortress of the king is in the territory of 16 to 18 hectares indicated by the cadastre [map] under the appellation 'rokko negro'. The centre of Rennes and the pierre du pain are this fortress which is found in the sign of Pisces (poisson/fish) - the treasure that is there is multiple in nature, such as precious stones by the Visigoths of the fifth century, gold and manuscripts by the Arabs who deposited [them in?] the tomb of Grand Roman between 711 and 715. I will add that the personality of the great Roman is not absolutely certain, the general thought was that it was Pompey (i.e. this is what Plantard advocated), but there is also... gerard de nerval, which would lean rather to the Emperor Nerva. This distinction between the two zones of treasure is both fundamental and related to the work of Saunière, who transferred to the fortress what was in the basement(?), but anyone that hasnt experienced the second will not know the first"6.
A little further on Critias [one of the novel's many characters] tells us that;
"on the left bank of the sals, beyond the cemetery, after the main square and the church. Here stood a pagan temple ... fifteen meters high which was set fire to (by?) Charles Martel in the year 737 during his attempted invasion of Languedoc. Also the statue of Isis that comes with the other relics - a head of Mercury and an arm Jupiter holding a cloth, a hand holding an egg. This information comes from the memories of Abbe Delmas - Who, having been responsible for a flow of ink, was also responsible for the flow of even more saliva!"
Here we can see that we return full circle back to Abbe Delmas. We can see Boudet's Cromlech is associated with various treasures - including one deposited by the Arabs in the tomb of the Grand Roman between 711 and 715 AD. [The Grand Roman epitaph has a link with the earlier Pompeius stone cited above as Plantard and Cherisey asserted that this stone came from, or helped locate, the tomb of the Grand Roman]. We see that the pagan Temple, for the Priory copyist was indicated by the head of Dagobert, but the same Temple was, for Boudet indicated by the Head of the Saviour, [and which was linked to his Cromlech]. This Temple, as we have seen above, had been converted to a Christian church but according to the Priory and also Boudet, was burnt down in the year 719AD or 737AD during the invasion by the Muslims or even Charles Martel of the Languedoc. And the Arabs - who fit the time span - were said to be previously aware of this Temple because they added gold and manuscripts to it - and Cherisey referred to this as the tomb of the Grand Roman!
In amongst this confused data, and to some, just ridiculous child's play and irrelevancies there is only one town that fits all these scenarios. It is indeed the village of Alet-les-Bains in Southern France. We see that the clues had been given to us throughout the obfuscation - when the object of that obfuscation had been the hiding of the intended meaning, making communication confusing, willfully ambiguous, and harder to interpret. The signposts were there though - that of Monsieur Cailhol of Alet, his mysterious heads, the Pompeius stone and the work of Boudet etc.
This is what Fedie has to say about Alet: We summarize our views on this phase of the historical existence of Alet as follows: the Romans, having, as they usually did, adopted, and changed the name of Alektha to Aletha, created in the locality a military station and a beach resort with the addition of a small religious building, and other special kinds of public institutions. Under their rule, the Gallo-Celtic oppidum did not increase and it remained important that the Romans called Alet a villaria - a village.
We know that when the Romans left it was the Visigoths who became the overlords of Septimania in which Alet stood.
However - "The year is 719 - Muslim settlers entered the Iberian Peninsula only seven years ago; they are now laying the foundations of a civilization that will endure for almost 800 years (See Aramco World , January-February 1993). Muslim armies, bolstered by recently-arrived troops from northern and southern Arabia - "Syrians" and "Yemenis" - cross the Pyrenees, probing deep into what they call "the Great Land," al-Ard al-Kabirah. They quickly capture most of Visigothic Septimania, including the once-great Roman centre of Narbonne, known in Arabic as Arbuna. The inhabitants of the city, mostly Arian Christians, are given honorable terms and allowed complete religious freedom by a treaty that resembles one granted to the Spanish Visigoth Theudemia of Murcia. The two documents together show that the Arabs had a very definite settlement policy in mind for the Visigothic possessions of Occitania - southern France - on the other side of the Pyrenees, with more generous and far-sighted conditions than were current in intra-European struggles. With Narbonne and its port secure, al-Samh ibn Malik, governor-general of al-Andalus, moved swiftly to subdue the surrounding area, taking Alet, south of Carcassonne, and Béziers, Agde, Lodève, Maguelonne (Montpellier) and Nîmes in fairly quick succession. By 721, he was ready for a new, decisive and far-reaching campaign" (http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issue/199302/the.arabs.in.occitania.htm).
So here we have a solid historical reference on the capture of the village of Alet by a Muslim Army. The year is around 719AD.
"After some initial success leading a large Arab army into Visigothic Septimania and besieging a number of towns and cities including Narbonne, Béziers, Agde, Lodève, Maguelonne (Montpellier) and Nîmes, al-Samh ibn Malik returned to Muslim Iberia to gather more Muslim fighters prior to attacking the strongly defended Aquitanian capital city of Toulouse. He returned to Septimania and on to southeastern Aquitaine with a massive army, siege engines, infantry, horsemen and mercenaries. The siege of Toulouse, with its near-impregnable walls, lasted until early summer. The defenders, short of provisions, were close to breaking when, around June 9, 721, Eudes the Great, the duke of Aquitaine, returned at the head of a large Aquitanian and Frankish force, attacking al-Samh's rear and launching a highly successful encircling movement. A major, decisive battle ensued. Caught between the Toulouse defenders and Eudes's men, al-Samh tried to break out, but was trapped with the bulk of his troops in a place that came to be called by Muslim chroniclers Balat al Shuhada ('the path of the martyrs') where he made a determined last stand as his army was decimated by the Christian forces. Al-Samh himself was critically wounded and died shortly afterwards". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Samh_ibn_Malik_al-Khawlani).
Charles Martel is also related to these events.
"The Battle of Toulouse (721) was a victory of an Aquitanian Christian army led by Duke Odo of Aquitaine over an Umayyad Muslim army besieging the city of Toulouse, and led by the governor of Al-Andalus, Al-Samh ibn Malik al-Khawlani. The victory checked the spread of Umayyad control westward from Narbonne into Aquitaine. Toulouse, was then Aquitaine's most important city, and Duke Odo of Aquitaine, also known as Eudes, immediately left to find help when war was near. He asked for the assistance of Charles Martel, who in turn preferred to wait and see rather than help his southern rival. Odo returned three months later—just as the city was about to surrender—and attacked the Muslim invaders on June 9. The victory was essentially the result of a classic enveloping movement by Odo. After Odo originally fled, the Muslims became overconfident, and instead of maintaining strong outer defenses around their siege camp, and continuously scouting, did neither. Thus, when Odo returned, he was able to launch an almost totally surprise attack on the siege force, scattering it with the first attack, and slaughtering units that were resting or fled without weapons or armour. Odo appealed to the Franks for assistance again, which Charles Martel only granted after he agreed to submit to Frankish authority. Some historians believe that the Battle of Toulouse halted the Muslim conquest of Europe even more than the later—and more celebrated—Battle of Tours (October 10, 732, between Tours and Poitiers), but this is highly problematic: for even had the Arabs won at Toulouse, they still would have had to conquer the Franks to retain control of the region. However, nearly all historians agree that the Christian victory at Toulouse was important in a macrohistorical sense: it gave Charles Martel badly needed time to strengthen his grip on power and build the veteran army which stood him in such good stead eleven years later at Tours"( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Toulouse_(721)
So is this pagan Temple that Boudet refers to really the one at Alet? Maybe so. It may also be significant about the 'beautiful head of the Saviour' which Boudet says is in the posession of Mr. Cailhol of Alet (for more on this see http://www.rhedesium.com/rennes-les-bains-note-on-a-carved-head-by-unbspgibert-and-gnbsprancoule.html). Bizarrely Alet has its own Saviour (St Salvayre church) and also some kind of worship of a Head. The site of Saint Salvayre has a place called the "dead man", a place beyond the merely symbolic, and it can be assumed that the eight carved heads on the church guard it. Intriguingly there was a ninth head, "the head of
the Saviour," which was the subject of an annual procession for the inhabitants
of Alet (http://desorchideesetdesorties.20minutes-blogs.fr/archive/2010/01/29/enigme-a-saint-salvayre-escale-sur-le-chemin-des-menhirs.html).
Uncannily similar to Boudet? We think so. And so do others.
For example, Pierre Silvain said:
" The ancient church of Saint Salvayre having burned before being moved (it was the "rock of the eagle"), we believe that it is described by Boudet at the end of a coded book. This means that through WORDS defined in the book and by using descriptions of locations in an arbitrary Cromleck and virtual one (at RLB), Boudet actually refers to places situated beyond, in a larger circle and which was fully understood by Hivert & Murat in "The Key of the Golden Secret of Rennes-le-Château" on page 97 viz: "Another form of relationship in the microcosm-macrocosm is seeing a similar, smaller or larger, than the original picture. This aspect is suggested to us by Boudet in his vision of a small Cromleck contained in a larger (p. 244), and containing a small circle within a larger (p. 246). The vision of a small Cromleck in the site of Rennes-les-Bains is not satisfactory, we have naturally to 'see' the opposite approach, consisting of seeing the Cromleck of Rennes-les-Bains in another or on a larger scale."
Following this therefore, the place called "Dead Man" of RLB becomes the "Dead Man" of Saint Salvayre, and the menhir not located by Boudet (there are only two!) is that of Saint Salvayre, the hole sealing the menhir of Saint Salvayre is not that of a cross as assumed Dr. Boyer, but the head of the Savior quoted by Boudet, which would have the merit of explaining the name of the hamlet, "Salvayre" meaning "Savior"! Note that the menhir of Saint Salvayre is located exactly on a ridge (= edge) and totally dominates the valley, and the head of the Saviour is just as Boudet (p.234) described it and "in the hands of Mr. Cailhol at Alet " closest to Saint Salvayre village".
The area of Saint Salvayre and l'Homme Mort and menhirs etc
Another striking point on the above map is the eagle rock, a few hundred metres from St Salvayre, in the SW. According to some researchers the area around Rennes-le-Château
contained the grave of Jesus Christ and the grave is said to have been found earlier in a cave beneath the rock of the Eagle. Other researchers say that Jesus was “buried underground in a secret cavern situated several hundreds metres” from the present village of St. Salvayre. No location was identified but the place “dominated a splendid landscape.” (just as Boudet suggested that his Head of the Saviour did!). There is a hill nearby, on the left of the road about a kilometre further, called “L’Homme mort” - the dead man. Meanwhile, others suggest that Christian Rosenkreutz, who founded the Rosicrucians, was buried near St, Salvayre!!
contained the grave of Jesus Christ and the grave is said to have been found earlier in a cave beneath the rock of the Eagle. Other researchers say that Jesus was “buried underground in a secret cavern situated several hundreds metres” from the present village of St. Salvayre. No location was identified but the place “dominated a splendid landscape.” (just as Boudet suggested that his Head of the Saviour did!). There is a hill nearby, on the left of the road about a kilometre further, called “L’Homme mort” - the dead man. Meanwhile, others suggest that Christian Rosenkreutz, who founded the Rosicrucians, was buried near St, Salvayre!!
The church at Saint Salvayre
Conclusions:
Its quite clear that Henri Boudet, through his written works, was trying to identify a specific important burial at the centre of his Cromlech. What is more this burial was associated with the Resurrection. The Cromlech, as we have seen, had as part of its architecture the 'Head of the Saviour' which was related in some way to a pagan Temple. Later analysis (obtained from clues in the Priory of Sion documentation) suggest that the Cromlech and Head of the Saviour to which Boudet really referred was in the vicinity of Saint Salvayre at Alet-les-Bains.
Other researchers have developed these theories further and suggested that the body of the historical Christ lays in rest in or around Alet les Bains (most notably a theory advanced by Pierre Silvain).
Elaborating on the historical data supplied as perhaps 'signposts' by Plantard and Cherisey regarding the Boudet Temple 'in the Valley of the Sal's' one discovers that Alet is vanquished by invading Muslim forces in around 719AD .... and Plantard et al certainly suggest that the Muslims knew of this pagan temple and also of an important tomb, an important tomb labelled as that of the Grand Roman. If the Muslims knew, it is of course certain that local families etc in the area would have known. Maybe also the monks that were living at the monastery in Alet (6th or 7th century) long before the founding of the Abbey of Alet in 813 by Bera.
It seems somewhat opportune then that it is precisely out of this Southern Gaul backdrop that Christian Doumergue discovered a text suggesting that the historical Christ was buried in this part of France. The text was dated by Ernst von Dobschütz (who was professor at the University of Halle, the University of Breslau and the University of Strasbourg (1870-1934) to the pre-Carolingian period. He dates its writing specifically to between 700 and 720 and he places its writing in the South of Gaul. Others have asserted that the text was composed around the town of Agde. In 1874, Wilhelm Creizenach asserted that connections between the death of Pilate episode in the manuscript and several other old French texts which locate the site of Pilate’s death in Southern Gaul mean that the text was probably written in Southern Gaul too. R A Lipsius argued that the legends in the manuscript originated in 8th Century Aquitania.
The title of this text is “The Avenging of the Saviour”. The IXth and XIth century version of the text includes the development about a crypt dedicated to Jesus built by the emperor Tiberius in the South of France... For Doumergue, it is the oldest literary indication ever found which refers to a construction of the grave of Christ in the South of France! This better preserved copy is conjectured by the above historians to be based on an earlier source text dated to the time of the Muslim invasion of Septimania and the vanquishing of Alet and other villages in the area. We may even use flight of fancy to speculate that the unknown monks of the very early but now vanished Monastery of Alet had a hand in the composing of the text.
Could it be that some people do actually sincerely believe the body of the historical Christ is indeed buried in the environs of Rennes-les-Bains or Rennes-le-Chateau or Alet-les-Bains?
Its quite clear that Henri Boudet, through his written works, was trying to identify a specific important burial at the centre of his Cromlech. What is more this burial was associated with the Resurrection. The Cromlech, as we have seen, had as part of its architecture the 'Head of the Saviour' which was related in some way to a pagan Temple. Later analysis (obtained from clues in the Priory of Sion documentation) suggest that the Cromlech and Head of the Saviour to which Boudet really referred was in the vicinity of Saint Salvayre at Alet-les-Bains.
Other researchers have developed these theories further and suggested that the body of the historical Christ lays in rest in or around Alet les Bains (most notably a theory advanced by Pierre Silvain).
Elaborating on the historical data supplied as perhaps 'signposts' by Plantard and Cherisey regarding the Boudet Temple 'in the Valley of the Sal's' one discovers that Alet is vanquished by invading Muslim forces in around 719AD .... and Plantard et al certainly suggest that the Muslims knew of this pagan temple and also of an important tomb, an important tomb labelled as that of the Grand Roman. If the Muslims knew, it is of course certain that local families etc in the area would have known. Maybe also the monks that were living at the monastery in Alet (6th or 7th century) long before the founding of the Abbey of Alet in 813 by Bera.
It seems somewhat opportune then that it is precisely out of this Southern Gaul backdrop that Christian Doumergue discovered a text suggesting that the historical Christ was buried in this part of France. The text was dated by Ernst von Dobschütz (who was professor at the University of Halle, the University of Breslau and the University of Strasbourg (1870-1934) to the pre-Carolingian period. He dates its writing specifically to between 700 and 720 and he places its writing in the South of Gaul. Others have asserted that the text was composed around the town of Agde. In 1874, Wilhelm Creizenach asserted that connections between the death of Pilate episode in the manuscript and several other old French texts which locate the site of Pilate’s death in Southern Gaul mean that the text was probably written in Southern Gaul too. R A Lipsius argued that the legends in the manuscript originated in 8th Century Aquitania.
The title of this text is “The Avenging of the Saviour”. The IXth and XIth century version of the text includes the development about a crypt dedicated to Jesus built by the emperor Tiberius in the South of France... For Doumergue, it is the oldest literary indication ever found which refers to a construction of the grave of Christ in the South of France! This better preserved copy is conjectured by the above historians to be based on an earlier source text dated to the time of the Muslim invasion of Septimania and the vanquishing of Alet and other villages in the area. We may even use flight of fancy to speculate that the unknown monks of the very early but now vanished Monastery of Alet had a hand in the composing of the text.
Could it be that some people do actually sincerely believe the body of the historical Christ is indeed buried in the environs of Rennes-les-Bains or Rennes-le-Chateau or Alet-les-Bains?
For more on these ideas see:
http://www.rhedesium.com/interview-with-christian-doumergue.html
http://www.rhedesium.com/tomb-of-christ-in-france.html
http://www.rhedesium.com/the-avenging-of-the-saviour.html
http://www.rhedesium.com/the-delmas-manuscript-and-the-tomb-of-a-roman.html
http://www.rhedesium.com/the-delmas-manuscript-part-two.html
http://www.rhedesium.com/interview-with-christian-doumergue.html
http://www.rhedesium.com/tomb-of-christ-in-france.html
http://www.rhedesium.com/the-avenging-of-the-saviour.html
http://www.rhedesium.com/the-delmas-manuscript-and-the-tomb-of-a-roman.html
http://www.rhedesium.com/the-delmas-manuscript-part-two.html
NOTES
1) Does this Temple have correlates with the so called Temple Rond referred to in Priory documentation? Pierre Plantard claimed that the secrets of the Priory of Sion were hidden in Roco Negro in a celtic sanctuary called 'The Round Temple of the Rocher Noir' (which could conceivably be imitating the Cromlech of Rennes-les-Bains for Henri Boudet!). In a Priory document this was further reported:
"THE ARCH, ITS SYMBOLISM by Jacques d’Arthuys (translated by Stephen Anderson),
"55 years ago, on this same day, 21 MAY 1934, six people founded the ALPHA-GALATES: George MONTI, Doctor SAVOIRE, Professor Maurice MONCHARVILLE, Marshal FRANCHET d’ESPERAY, Professor Louis LEFUR and the writer Gabriel TRARIEUX d’EGMOND, in truth they copied the ORDER of the PRIORY of SION, by taking again its symbolism with the ARCH. All six belonged to the PRIORY of SION. Moreover one was follower of B' NAI B' RITH, another member of the GRAND ORIENT, a third founder of the AMITIES AFRICAINES, a fourth of the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY. For them, the ARCH was posed on the surface of the water which appeared as the sign of PEACE and WISDOM in the turmoil, it was the token of the covenant, the guardian of the very essene of the tradition, its form was the true representation of the Hebraic letter: [Cheth] the generating movement of life, its number is 8, it is the "fence" of defense, the sum of its three sides is 22, its center is the way which guides the ARK towards the STAR. The ARCH was the origin of the foundation of the PRIORY of SION and represents its summit nowadays. Its composition is of thirteen members, the ROSE+CROIX, which meet in the round temple of the Black Rock, according to the legend this place was formerly a temple of MITHRAS, its form is that of a half rings of 12 toises - 15 having 13 stone seats. Each seat is engraved of a letter, that is to say: AB URBE CONDITA. On the ground is a GOLD SUN of 1 toise 52 bearing these letters: MM CD XXX IV which is 2434 in Roman numerals, it seems recent, undoubtedly engraved by a HAUTPOUL towards the end of the 17th century. The old entry is obstructed for more than [number illegible] toises, a drilling opened an entry in the south. Nowadays the ARCH radiates on a great part of the world, it is to its summit that the chiefs of the States will come to seek PEACE".
1) Does this Temple have correlates with the so called Temple Rond referred to in Priory documentation? Pierre Plantard claimed that the secrets of the Priory of Sion were hidden in Roco Negro in a celtic sanctuary called 'The Round Temple of the Rocher Noir' (which could conceivably be imitating the Cromlech of Rennes-les-Bains for Henri Boudet!). In a Priory document this was further reported:
"THE ARCH, ITS SYMBOLISM by Jacques d’Arthuys (translated by Stephen Anderson),
"55 years ago, on this same day, 21 MAY 1934, six people founded the ALPHA-GALATES: George MONTI, Doctor SAVOIRE, Professor Maurice MONCHARVILLE, Marshal FRANCHET d’ESPERAY, Professor Louis LEFUR and the writer Gabriel TRARIEUX d’EGMOND, in truth they copied the ORDER of the PRIORY of SION, by taking again its symbolism with the ARCH. All six belonged to the PRIORY of SION. Moreover one was follower of B' NAI B' RITH, another member of the GRAND ORIENT, a third founder of the AMITIES AFRICAINES, a fourth of the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY. For them, the ARCH was posed on the surface of the water which appeared as the sign of PEACE and WISDOM in the turmoil, it was the token of the covenant, the guardian of the very essene of the tradition, its form was the true representation of the Hebraic letter: [Cheth] the generating movement of life, its number is 8, it is the "fence" of defense, the sum of its three sides is 22, its center is the way which guides the ARK towards the STAR. The ARCH was the origin of the foundation of the PRIORY of SION and represents its summit nowadays. Its composition is of thirteen members, the ROSE+CROIX, which meet in the round temple of the Black Rock, according to the legend this place was formerly a temple of MITHRAS, its form is that of a half rings of 12 toises - 15 having 13 stone seats. Each seat is engraved of a letter, that is to say: AB URBE CONDITA. On the ground is a GOLD SUN of 1 toise 52 bearing these letters: MM CD XXX IV which is 2434 in Roman numerals, it seems recent, undoubtedly engraved by a HAUTPOUL towards the end of the 17th century. The old entry is obstructed for more than [number illegible] toises, a drilling opened an entry in the south. Nowadays the ARCH radiates on a great part of the world, it is to its summit that the chiefs of the States will come to seek PEACE".
Priory depiction of this Temple Rond at Roc Negro.
Some have even speculated that this diagrammatic representation suggest this site:
The old Roman baths at Bains Doux
Its interesting to note that this area does carry a tradition also of a hidden tomb being found very recently - The Abbé Delmas had spoken of a huge pagan temple, 15 metres high, situated just "south of Rennes les Bains"7. And in the local folklore of Rennes les Bains he is associated with an area indicated by the so called Delmas Cross. According to tradition, the cross indicates a cavity where once contained the tomb of the "Roman" which had also been referred to by Abbé Delmas in a previous essay he had written. The wall behind the Cross was supposed to have concealed a small cavity, which - according to a witness quoted by Jacques Rivière - consisted of:
"an empty room, 1 meter in height and 80, 2 and 2 meters wide and 5 meters deep
Furthermore, the folklore tales suggest that this ’room’ was emptied in secret during some building works being carried out in the area where the Cross was situated in 1987. There are witnesses who have claimed to have seen the discovery of a treasure, and that it was promptly stolen during the night and sent to an antique shop in Bordeaux! These ‘legends’ might, however, suggest that the building works being carried out at the time brought to light the discovery of some items of archaeological importance, but since the intervention of the authorities would have slowed down the building works, steps were taken to conceal everything. Rivière does not exclude the existence of a room similar to that described above: according to archaeologists, some of the baths at Rennes had been dug under the mountains at Rennes les Bains".
On my last trip to Rennes, i spoke to some locals at Campagne-sur-Aude regarding the incident which occurred in 1987. They were adamant 'something' had been found and smuggled out ...with at least one witness saying he saw all the activity.
The tomb of the Roman of Delmas, might conceivably refer also to the ‘sepulchre of the Grand Roman’ that Chérisey talks about in Circuit. For Chérisey, this tomb was in the environs of Rennes les Bains, and was near a main road, precisely as the Delmas site is.
2) One wonders from what knowledge Boudet is speaking from? Marble columns and bases? Who found these and where? It might even suggest a local Temple, with the remains of its columns and bases?
3) Lucius Sergius Paulus or Paullus was a Proconsul of Cyprus under Claudius (1st century AD). He appears in Acts 13:6-13, where in Paphos Paul, accompanied by Barnabas and John Mark, overcame the attempts of Bar-Jesus (Elymas) "to turn the proconsul away from the faith" and converted Sergius to Christianity.
A boundary stone of Claudius mentioning Sergius was discovered at Rome in 1887. It records the appointment (AD 47) of the Curators of the banks and the channel of the river Tiber,
one of whom was Sergius. Since Paul's journey to Cyprus is usually dated to the first half of the 40s (and some scholars date his visit even earlier), it is thought Sergius may have first served three years as Proconsul at Cyprus, then returned to Rome, where he was appointed curator. As he is not greeted in Paul's Epistle to the Romans, it is possible he died before it was written.
Some medieval legends have anachronistically identified Sergius Paulus with Paul of Narbonne.
Elymas, also known as Bar-Jesus (arc. Bar-Yeshua, lat. Bariesu), was a Jewish magician who appears in the New Testament in the Acts of the Apostles, chapter 13. The Acts of the Apostles calls him a magus, which the King James Bible here translates as "sorcerer".
He is represented as opposing Paul of Tarsus, who is called at this point for the first time with
his Roman name, and Barnabas in the city of Paphos on Cyprus, when Sergius Paulus, the Roman Proconsul, wishes to hear Paul and Barnabas speak about Jesus. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elymas, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergius_Paulus).
With all the speculation in the Rennes-le-Chateau research community of the historical Jesus being married and having a son it seems strange that Elymas, also known as Bar-Yeshua - literally translated as 'son of Jesus', living at the correct time and linked to Christianity is not seized upon!
4) This Croix of the Cercle is highlighted in other Priory documentation, for example these illustrated below. It is also interesting to note the work of French researcher Thierry
Espalion at his website here - http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://rennes-chateau.onlc.fr/75-Les-alentours-du-hameau-Le-Cercle---Rennes-les-bains.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://rennes-chateau.onlc.fr/75-Les-alentours-du-hameau-Le-Cercle---Rennes-les-bains.html%26hl%3Den%26tbo%3Dd%26biw%3D1904%26bih%3D892&sa=X&ei=Ige6ULuPMKS-0QWk2YDwCA&ved=0CDAQ7gEwAA
"an empty room, 1 meter in height and 80, 2 and 2 meters wide and 5 meters deep
Furthermore, the folklore tales suggest that this ’room’ was emptied in secret during some building works being carried out in the area where the Cross was situated in 1987. There are witnesses who have claimed to have seen the discovery of a treasure, and that it was promptly stolen during the night and sent to an antique shop in Bordeaux! These ‘legends’ might, however, suggest that the building works being carried out at the time brought to light the discovery of some items of archaeological importance, but since the intervention of the authorities would have slowed down the building works, steps were taken to conceal everything. Rivière does not exclude the existence of a room similar to that described above: according to archaeologists, some of the baths at Rennes had been dug under the mountains at Rennes les Bains".
On my last trip to Rennes, i spoke to some locals at Campagne-sur-Aude regarding the incident which occurred in 1987. They were adamant 'something' had been found and smuggled out ...with at least one witness saying he saw all the activity.
The tomb of the Roman of Delmas, might conceivably refer also to the ‘sepulchre of the Grand Roman’ that Chérisey talks about in Circuit. For Chérisey, this tomb was in the environs of Rennes les Bains, and was near a main road, precisely as the Delmas site is.
2) One wonders from what knowledge Boudet is speaking from? Marble columns and bases? Who found these and where? It might even suggest a local Temple, with the remains of its columns and bases?
3) Lucius Sergius Paulus or Paullus was a Proconsul of Cyprus under Claudius (1st century AD). He appears in Acts 13:6-13, where in Paphos Paul, accompanied by Barnabas and John Mark, overcame the attempts of Bar-Jesus (Elymas) "to turn the proconsul away from the faith" and converted Sergius to Christianity.
A boundary stone of Claudius mentioning Sergius was discovered at Rome in 1887. It records the appointment (AD 47) of the Curators of the banks and the channel of the river Tiber,
one of whom was Sergius. Since Paul's journey to Cyprus is usually dated to the first half of the 40s (and some scholars date his visit even earlier), it is thought Sergius may have first served three years as Proconsul at Cyprus, then returned to Rome, where he was appointed curator. As he is not greeted in Paul's Epistle to the Romans, it is possible he died before it was written.
Some medieval legends have anachronistically identified Sergius Paulus with Paul of Narbonne.
Elymas, also known as Bar-Jesus (arc. Bar-Yeshua, lat. Bariesu), was a Jewish magician who appears in the New Testament in the Acts of the Apostles, chapter 13. The Acts of the Apostles calls him a magus, which the King James Bible here translates as "sorcerer".
He is represented as opposing Paul of Tarsus, who is called at this point for the first time with
his Roman name, and Barnabas in the city of Paphos on Cyprus, when Sergius Paulus, the Roman Proconsul, wishes to hear Paul and Barnabas speak about Jesus. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elymas, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergius_Paulus).
With all the speculation in the Rennes-le-Chateau research community of the historical Jesus being married and having a son it seems strange that Elymas, also known as Bar-Yeshua - literally translated as 'son of Jesus', living at the correct time and linked to Christianity is not seized upon!
4) This Croix of the Cercle is highlighted in other Priory documentation, for example these illustrated below. It is also interesting to note the work of French researcher Thierry
Espalion at his website here - http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://rennes-chateau.onlc.fr/75-Les-alentours-du-hameau-Le-Cercle---Rennes-les-bains.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://rennes-chateau.onlc.fr/75-Les-alentours-du-hameau-Le-Cercle---Rennes-les-bains.html%26hl%3Den%26tbo%3Dd%26biw%3D1904%26bih%3D892&sa=X&ei=Ige6ULuPMKS-0QWk2YDwCA&ved=0CDAQ7gEwAA
|
|
5) What young man? Why was he defacing the 'Head'? Or was he ransacking the Temple? Did Boudet and Cailhol find the 'Head' together and rescue it together?
6) This associates the Cromlech (16 - 18 hectares) with the 'Roco Negro' and the tomb of the Grand Roman (as indeed other Priory documents cited above also do). It associates the dates of around 711AD with the pre-Carolingian age and the Islamic conquest of Southern Gaul. His assertion that the carved 'Head of Dagobert' was created in 700AD further associates it with these events and time span. Why?
But we know that Chérisey talks in riddles and that from one line in his prose to the next (or even from one word to the next) meanings may change and he could be referring to something on the one hand, but simultaneously to something else, perhaps even in the same sentence. Remember when he wrote; To this, Dear Reader, be careful not to add or remove an iota... meditate, meditate again, the vile lead of my writing contains perhaps the purest gold! In this way, a Cromlech of Rennes-les-Bains and a pagan Temple at Rennes-les-Bains can also be associated with a 'Head of Dagobert' which is linked to the 'Head of the Saviour' at Saint Salvayre at Alet-les-Bains and another Temple there!
7) In actual fact, i do not think Delmas does make a reference to a 'pagan' temple. I am certain that the correlation was made in a Priory document (see here) and that the authors of this document had obviously pilched it from Henri Boudet's 'La Vrai Langue Celtique'. However, what is interesting is that Delmas thinks the area around the Bains de la Reyne (Reine) shows some evidence of being burnt. He thinks the little village in this area (and perhaps wider afield?) was burnt. He refers to Rennes-les-Bains as this 'unfortunate place'! He said: "So many people died here; that is what is surmised by so great a number of pieces of urns; which are found not only in the valley but also in the mountains".
6) This associates the Cromlech (16 - 18 hectares) with the 'Roco Negro' and the tomb of the Grand Roman (as indeed other Priory documents cited above also do). It associates the dates of around 711AD with the pre-Carolingian age and the Islamic conquest of Southern Gaul. His assertion that the carved 'Head of Dagobert' was created in 700AD further associates it with these events and time span. Why?
But we know that Chérisey talks in riddles and that from one line in his prose to the next (or even from one word to the next) meanings may change and he could be referring to something on the one hand, but simultaneously to something else, perhaps even in the same sentence. Remember when he wrote; To this, Dear Reader, be careful not to add or remove an iota... meditate, meditate again, the vile lead of my writing contains perhaps the purest gold! In this way, a Cromlech of Rennes-les-Bains and a pagan Temple at Rennes-les-Bains can also be associated with a 'Head of Dagobert' which is linked to the 'Head of the Saviour' at Saint Salvayre at Alet-les-Bains and another Temple there!
7) In actual fact, i do not think Delmas does make a reference to a 'pagan' temple. I am certain that the correlation was made in a Priory document (see here) and that the authors of this document had obviously pilched it from Henri Boudet's 'La Vrai Langue Celtique'. However, what is interesting is that Delmas thinks the area around the Bains de la Reyne (Reine) shows some evidence of being burnt. He thinks the little village in this area (and perhaps wider afield?) was burnt. He refers to Rennes-les-Bains as this 'unfortunate place'! He said: "So many people died here; that is what is surmised by so great a number of pieces of urns; which are found not only in the valley but also in the mountains".
