More on the Seventh Legion
and it's [alleged] history at
Rennes-les-Bains
Introduction
I have recently become interested in the assertions made by Abbe Delmas [in 1709] that the settlers of the original Roman village of Rennes-les-Bains were veteran soldiers from the Seventh Legion. In his manuscript 'Antiquités des bains de Montferrand communément appelés les bains de Rennes' [1709] Delmas wrote:
"The tenth Roman colony was called Colonia Decimenorum and was augmented on the orders of Julius Caesar, who called it Colonia Sulla Patena, as evidenced by numerous inscriptions found in Narbonne. The colony which settled in Beziers was drawn from the Seventh Legion and was called Colonia Septimanorum. One was established at Nimes, which was drawn from the legion which went to Egypt to conquer Mark Antony, and because of that, the town of Nimes has a crocodile for its arms. Those who lived at Bains were also drawn from this legion and it is for this reason that there is a great number of medals of this legion [at Rennes-les-Bains] as well as other medallions from Montpellier".
Although on several readings it can be confusing which legion Delmas thinks settled directly at Rennes-les-Bains - the point becomes moot - because whether he suggests that it is the Tenth or the Seventh legion their histories are so entwined that it becomes irrelevant. History shows that the veterans of the Tenth Legion [Caesars favourite] obtained lands at Narbonne ... and this legion colonised Nimes and Beziers. As we know, some historians think that the area of Septimania received it's name from the old name of Beziers: that of Colonia Julia Baeterrae Septimanorum. This may derive in part from the settlement of the VIIth Legion in the city and the towns that the land included.
It seems that Delmas confused the histories of the Tenth and Seventh legion, perhaps precisely because their histories were so inter-woven. The Tenth legion veterans received land around Narbo Martius. According to Velleius Paterculus (Roman History, 1.15.5), this Narbo Martius was founded in 118 BCE as a Roman colonia on land of the Volcae Arecomisci, who had lived there on a hill fort that is now named Montlaurès but used to be called Naro (Avienus, 587). The new city and colony was part of a general project to develop the area: this included the building of the Via Domitia which connected Italy and Hispania. Narbo used to command a crossing in the Arax (Aude), which emptied itself in a lagoon that was connected to the Mediterranean Sea. The Roman town soon became the capital of a new province.
Narbo is spoken of as the "naval-station of the Arecomisci alone, though it would be fairer to add "and of the rest of Celtica" - so greatly has it surpassed the others in the number of people who use it as a trade center. [...] They are no longer barbarians, but are, for the most part, transformed to the type of the Romans, both in their speech and in their modes of living, and some of them in their civic life as well". [Strabo, Geography, 4.1.12; tr. H.L. Jones]
When Strabo wrote these words, Julius Caesar had already refounded the city. The reason for this was that the most powerful city in southern France, Massilia, had resisted Caesar during the civil wars; the dictator now wanted to break its power and therefore resettled Narbo with his veterans. The full name of the city became Colonia Julia Paterna Decumanorum, "the ancestral Julian colony of the soldiers of the Tenth".
The Seventh legion, however, has a more direct link to Nimes. Why? Because veteran soldiers of the Seventh are believed to have settled in Septimania as i mentioned above. Another possible derivation of the towns name is the reference to the seven cities of the same territory: Béziers, Elne, Agde, Narbonne, Lodève, Maguelonne and Nîmes. When Delmas writes "One was established at Nimes, which was drawn from the legion which went to Egypt to conquer Mark Antony, and because of that, the town of Nimes has a crocodile for its arms" he probably means the Seventh legion too, which colonised Septimania and two of its cities, Nimes and Beziers. Presumably the soldiers, for Delmas, farming the land at Beziers and Nimes also decided to live at the thermal spa village of Rennes-les-Bains. Or perhaps even build a Roman Bath there?
The Romans were obsessed with their Baths. As Delmas wrote:
"The Romans made such a big thing of the baths and spent such alot on them. Here they found that nature herself had prepared them herself. In their vanity they built a great number of baths with great magnificence. Agrippa had one built at his expense from the year of his edilship....for public use. The slaves had their own. Pliny affirms that in Rome there was an infinite number. As to their magnificance we can believe Arien, who tells us that whole provinces were jealous of their grandeur. Those of Anthony had 1,600 rooms, Diocletian had 3,200. The channels which brought the water into the baths were made of silver, walls were encrusted with gold and gemstones and the whole edifice was supported on columns ...."
I have recently become interested in the assertions made by Abbe Delmas [in 1709] that the settlers of the original Roman village of Rennes-les-Bains were veteran soldiers from the Seventh Legion. In his manuscript 'Antiquités des bains de Montferrand communément appelés les bains de Rennes' [1709] Delmas wrote:
"The tenth Roman colony was called Colonia Decimenorum and was augmented on the orders of Julius Caesar, who called it Colonia Sulla Patena, as evidenced by numerous inscriptions found in Narbonne. The colony which settled in Beziers was drawn from the Seventh Legion and was called Colonia Septimanorum. One was established at Nimes, which was drawn from the legion which went to Egypt to conquer Mark Antony, and because of that, the town of Nimes has a crocodile for its arms. Those who lived at Bains were also drawn from this legion and it is for this reason that there is a great number of medals of this legion [at Rennes-les-Bains] as well as other medallions from Montpellier".
Although on several readings it can be confusing which legion Delmas thinks settled directly at Rennes-les-Bains - the point becomes moot - because whether he suggests that it is the Tenth or the Seventh legion their histories are so entwined that it becomes irrelevant. History shows that the veterans of the Tenth Legion [Caesars favourite] obtained lands at Narbonne ... and this legion colonised Nimes and Beziers. As we know, some historians think that the area of Septimania received it's name from the old name of Beziers: that of Colonia Julia Baeterrae Septimanorum. This may derive in part from the settlement of the VIIth Legion in the city and the towns that the land included.
It seems that Delmas confused the histories of the Tenth and Seventh legion, perhaps precisely because their histories were so inter-woven. The Tenth legion veterans received land around Narbo Martius. According to Velleius Paterculus (Roman History, 1.15.5), this Narbo Martius was founded in 118 BCE as a Roman colonia on land of the Volcae Arecomisci, who had lived there on a hill fort that is now named Montlaurès but used to be called Naro (Avienus, 587). The new city and colony was part of a general project to develop the area: this included the building of the Via Domitia which connected Italy and Hispania. Narbo used to command a crossing in the Arax (Aude), which emptied itself in a lagoon that was connected to the Mediterranean Sea. The Roman town soon became the capital of a new province.
Narbo is spoken of as the "naval-station of the Arecomisci alone, though it would be fairer to add "and of the rest of Celtica" - so greatly has it surpassed the others in the number of people who use it as a trade center. [...] They are no longer barbarians, but are, for the most part, transformed to the type of the Romans, both in their speech and in their modes of living, and some of them in their civic life as well". [Strabo, Geography, 4.1.12; tr. H.L. Jones]
When Strabo wrote these words, Julius Caesar had already refounded the city. The reason for this was that the most powerful city in southern France, Massilia, had resisted Caesar during the civil wars; the dictator now wanted to break its power and therefore resettled Narbo with his veterans. The full name of the city became Colonia Julia Paterna Decumanorum, "the ancestral Julian colony of the soldiers of the Tenth".
The Seventh legion, however, has a more direct link to Nimes. Why? Because veteran soldiers of the Seventh are believed to have settled in Septimania as i mentioned above. Another possible derivation of the towns name is the reference to the seven cities of the same territory: Béziers, Elne, Agde, Narbonne, Lodève, Maguelonne and Nîmes. When Delmas writes "One was established at Nimes, which was drawn from the legion which went to Egypt to conquer Mark Antony, and because of that, the town of Nimes has a crocodile for its arms" he probably means the Seventh legion too, which colonised Septimania and two of its cities, Nimes and Beziers. Presumably the soldiers, for Delmas, farming the land at Beziers and Nimes also decided to live at the thermal spa village of Rennes-les-Bains. Or perhaps even build a Roman Bath there?
The Romans were obsessed with their Baths. As Delmas wrote:
"The Romans made such a big thing of the baths and spent such alot on them. Here they found that nature herself had prepared them herself. In their vanity they built a great number of baths with great magnificence. Agrippa had one built at his expense from the year of his edilship....for public use. The slaves had their own. Pliny affirms that in Rome there was an infinite number. As to their magnificance we can believe Arien, who tells us that whole provinces were jealous of their grandeur. Those of Anthony had 1,600 rooms, Diocletian had 3,200. The channels which brought the water into the baths were made of silver, walls were encrusted with gold and gemstones and the whole edifice was supported on columns ...."
Both the Tenth and the Seventh legion are associated with Julius Caesar and a later battle to conquer Marc Anthony. When Caesar became governor of Gallia Cisalpina and Gallia Narbonensis, he took charge of four already existing legions (numbered VII, VIII, IX and X), and during the campaigns in Gaul and in the Civil War against Pompey, the army grew. When Caesar was murdered, there were many more legions, which were taken over by Caesar's successors.
We then read from Delmas about a stone monument in his possession:
"It is a pedestal. It has a C ... at the top, Pompeivs Qvartvs along the length, underneath is J.A.M. and at the base SVO. On the back of the stone is a laurel".
For Delmas the stone refers to the Pompeius family (fem. Pompeia) sometimes anglicized as Pompey, with the nomen of the gens Pompeia, who were an important family of ancient Rome [from the Italian region of Picenum], which lies between the Apennines and the Adriatic. This family is central to the lives of Caesar, Marc Anthony and Octavian.
It is this family which Delmas suggests is related to the Roman tombstone remains of C. POMPEIVS QVARTVS PAM SVO - a tomb fragment which he said was found at Rennes-les-Bains. Delmas wrote: "Several antiquarians have endeavoured to explain this inscription but they cannot agree. If anyone would like to make it their study they would be doing those interested in it a great favour. Here are some of the meanings that have been suggested. Pompeius Quartus is the father of Pompey the Great, who was the fifth of that name, as he was succeeded by his son who was called Pompeius Sextus, who is mentioned in history and who was conquered by Agrippa, son-in-law of Augustus, in Sicily. The inscription is explained in this manner: C. Neius Pompeius quartus Julio inisitis suo or amico maximo suo. It is conjectured that Pompey the Great, going to Spain at the time of Sulla, went there to fight Sertorius. After his death this great prince left two children, one of whom bore the name Cneius Pompeius, the other Sextus Pompeius, one was defeated during a naval battle in Sicily and the other in Spain. Travelling through this country on his way to Spain, one of his great friends or one of his foremost officers being dead, Pompey raised a sort of mausoleum or column over his tomb and this is one of the stones from that column. As a result it is claimed that it is a tombstone inscription. It may seem ridiculous to claim that Pompey traveled through this wayward country, but one should not be surprised since the clear marks of a chariot can be seen passing through places where at present men cannot pass!" [my exclamation mark].
Which Pompey does he mean when he refers to the raising of a mausoleum? On close reading it seems that it could be Pompey the Greats own tomb, but it could also mean Sextus Pompeius at a push. It can also seem that Pompey the Great raised a column over the mausoleum of one of his 'foremost officers' - who had died on the way to Spain [to fight Sertorius?].
Another translation which reads a little better is as follows:
"It is usual to explain the inscription as follows: Cneius Pompeius Quartus - For all to see, His friend Julio Maximo [i.e. a monument built by a friend of Pompey Strabo?]. It is also assumed that Pompey the Great [son of Pompey Strabo] passed through here [?Rennes-les-Bains] while he was traveling to Spain at the time of Sulla, to fight Sertorius. [Another theory is] that this great prince [Pompey the Great] left, after his death, two children: one called Cneius Pompeius and the other Sextus Pompeius. They were defeated in two naval battles, one in Sicily and the other in Spain. Pompey, on his way to Spain, passed in this country and built a sort of mausoleum or column on the grave of a dead officer or a great friend, this stone was part of the column. It follows then that tradition will see this as a funerary monument. It seems ridiculous that we assume that Pompey has passed in this poor country... "
Delmas' assertion that some feel the pedestal refers to the father of Pompey the Great, because he was the fourth Pompieus of that name, and that his son and grandson therefore were numbered fifth and sixth respectively - loses what little credibility it had when we realise that Pompey Strabo had a father who was also a Sextus! This is clearly shown in the table below:
We then read from Delmas about a stone monument in his possession:
"It is a pedestal. It has a C ... at the top, Pompeivs Qvartvs along the length, underneath is J.A.M. and at the base SVO. On the back of the stone is a laurel".
For Delmas the stone refers to the Pompeius family (fem. Pompeia) sometimes anglicized as Pompey, with the nomen of the gens Pompeia, who were an important family of ancient Rome [from the Italian region of Picenum], which lies between the Apennines and the Adriatic. This family is central to the lives of Caesar, Marc Anthony and Octavian.
It is this family which Delmas suggests is related to the Roman tombstone remains of C. POMPEIVS QVARTVS PAM SVO - a tomb fragment which he said was found at Rennes-les-Bains. Delmas wrote: "Several antiquarians have endeavoured to explain this inscription but they cannot agree. If anyone would like to make it their study they would be doing those interested in it a great favour. Here are some of the meanings that have been suggested. Pompeius Quartus is the father of Pompey the Great, who was the fifth of that name, as he was succeeded by his son who was called Pompeius Sextus, who is mentioned in history and who was conquered by Agrippa, son-in-law of Augustus, in Sicily. The inscription is explained in this manner: C. Neius Pompeius quartus Julio inisitis suo or amico maximo suo. It is conjectured that Pompey the Great, going to Spain at the time of Sulla, went there to fight Sertorius. After his death this great prince left two children, one of whom bore the name Cneius Pompeius, the other Sextus Pompeius, one was defeated during a naval battle in Sicily and the other in Spain. Travelling through this country on his way to Spain, one of his great friends or one of his foremost officers being dead, Pompey raised a sort of mausoleum or column over his tomb and this is one of the stones from that column. As a result it is claimed that it is a tombstone inscription. It may seem ridiculous to claim that Pompey traveled through this wayward country, but one should not be surprised since the clear marks of a chariot can be seen passing through places where at present men cannot pass!" [my exclamation mark].
Which Pompey does he mean when he refers to the raising of a mausoleum? On close reading it seems that it could be Pompey the Greats own tomb, but it could also mean Sextus Pompeius at a push. It can also seem that Pompey the Great raised a column over the mausoleum of one of his 'foremost officers' - who had died on the way to Spain [to fight Sertorius?].
Another translation which reads a little better is as follows:
"It is usual to explain the inscription as follows: Cneius Pompeius Quartus - For all to see, His friend Julio Maximo [i.e. a monument built by a friend of Pompey Strabo?]. It is also assumed that Pompey the Great [son of Pompey Strabo] passed through here [?Rennes-les-Bains] while he was traveling to Spain at the time of Sulla, to fight Sertorius. [Another theory is] that this great prince [Pompey the Great] left, after his death, two children: one called Cneius Pompeius and the other Sextus Pompeius. They were defeated in two naval battles, one in Sicily and the other in Spain. Pompey, on his way to Spain, passed in this country and built a sort of mausoleum or column on the grave of a dead officer or a great friend, this stone was part of the column. It follows then that tradition will see this as a funerary monument. It seems ridiculous that we assume that Pompey has passed in this poor country... "
Delmas' assertion that some feel the pedestal refers to the father of Pompey the Great, because he was the fourth Pompieus of that name, and that his son and grandson therefore were numbered fifth and sixth respectively - loses what little credibility it had when we realise that Pompey Strabo had a father who was also a Sextus! This is clearly shown in the table below:
Reading these accounts by Delmas i am none the wiser as to which Pompey is being remembered, who the friend was that felt moved to raise the monument and indeed, why they were all at Rennes-les-Bains! And even why it had to be a famous Pompeius at all?
Chérisey's take on the matter
I have referred many times to the different works of Chérisey [particularly his novel Circuit]. He does make references to this Pompeius pedestal stone. The most direct reference comes in the form of a diagram he drew in 1961. It is shown below:
Chérisey's take on the matter
I have referred many times to the different works of Chérisey [particularly his novel Circuit]. He does make references to this Pompeius pedestal stone. The most direct reference comes in the form of a diagram he drew in 1961. It is shown below:
We will discuss the diagram in a moment. For now we must quote a passage from Chérisey's work, Circuit. He has a character in the novel named Critias say:
"..... well, if Sertorius, his rival, is buried in the island of iron, then he [is?] even buried in Rennes, basing the dialogue between the two zero meridians. Defeated by a naulogue - the great Pompey was in Asia Minor and was assassinated at Milet. Milesian philosophers embalmed his body [which] becomes an object of veneration until the Arabs seized the relic, the body was taken to Rennes [?les Bains] during the invasion of Languedoc and the body was given an inviolable burial of marble and lead by Roc Negro. The funeral plaque still exists, you can see it at the museum of Perpignan - C. Pompey Quartus DM SVO".
So using 'Circuit' and the diagram above, for Chérisey the Pompeius of note is Sextus Pompeius, that his body was embalmed and later buried in a marble tomb at Roc Negro. And in fact the diagram suggests that the Pompeius pedestal is a marker to the entrance of the necropolis, which looks like it is sited further away and actually in Pech Cardou [see below].
"..... well, if Sertorius, his rival, is buried in the island of iron, then he [is?] even buried in Rennes, basing the dialogue between the two zero meridians. Defeated by a naulogue - the great Pompey was in Asia Minor and was assassinated at Milet. Milesian philosophers embalmed his body [which] becomes an object of veneration until the Arabs seized the relic, the body was taken to Rennes [?les Bains] during the invasion of Languedoc and the body was given an inviolable burial of marble and lead by Roc Negro. The funeral plaque still exists, you can see it at the museum of Perpignan - C. Pompey Quartus DM SVO".
So using 'Circuit' and the diagram above, for Chérisey the Pompeius of note is Sextus Pompeius, that his body was embalmed and later buried in a marble tomb at Roc Negro. And in fact the diagram suggests that the Pompeius pedestal is a marker to the entrance of the necropolis, which looks like it is sited further away and actually in Pech Cardou [see below].
Based on Chérisey's map is there a mysterious tomb somewhere near Cardou as marked here? And actually, looking at the area, this does not seem to be too far away from the lands Plantard bought around the area of Camp Redon. This was supposed to reflect the fact that near here Plantard believed there was a Temple Rond. And as it happens what has this tomb to do with Plantards Pompey tomb at Fangalots - which he told us about? The one not far from his land? Unless he meant the land he bought near Camp Redon/Rok Negro?
If by the 'great Pompey' Chérisey means Pompey the Great, then we already know that Pompey was murdered at Pelesium. However, the mention of the naval Battle of Naulochus, is reference to a battle, fought on 3 September 36 BC between the fleets of Sextus Pompeius and Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, off Naulochus, Sicily. The victory of Agrippa, admiral of Octavian, marked the end of the Pompeian resistance to the Second Triumvirate.
So the mysterious Roman would appear to be Sextus Pompeius. But what was really so grand about him? Why would Milesian philosophers embalm his body which then becomes an object of veneration? Why would Chérisey say this 'Pompeius' was buried at Roc Negro? The issue becomes even more confusing when you look at what Chérisey wrote on the diagram. Quite in contradiction to other assertions he has made elsewhere, Chérisey writes in relation to this Pompeius stone that it is a:
"white marble stone, discovered in 1600 on the parcel of land A3 647 [or combination of numbers, it is difficult to make out on the text] of Roc Negro at Rennes-les-Bains, Aude. It marked the entry to the necropolis of the Grand Roman [?] Lucius Cneis [?] Pompeius Quartus"
Two things of note here. It would seem that this 'necropolis' at or around Roc Negro is the Temple Rond that both Plantard and Chérisey were fond of referring to. This Temple had some bearing on the creation of the second version of the Priory of Sion. This ‘version’ starts with its founder Jean-Timoleon Nègri d’Ables along with the help of Blaise d’Hautpoul (d.1694) and Abbé André-Hercule de Fleury (d.1743 and who is the brother of Marie de Fleury and who married February 1680 Bernardin de Rosset of Rocozels (? -1720), lord of Rocozels Bouloc and Ceilhes and whose later descendant was Paul-François-Vincent de Fleury). This Priory is said to be ‘a more or less direct successor of the Children of St Vincent and (probably) of the Company of the Blessed Sacrament founded in 1629 by Henri de Lévis’.
Blaise d’Hautpoul and Abbé André-Hercule de Fleury were involved at this time with the mines being opened up on Roc Negro which appears to me to have some significance regarding these family connections. These events may even be at the origin of the Hautpoul ‘treasure story’. It is said that ‘In the spring of 1645, a shepherd called Ignace Paris found an unknown quantity of golden coins on the lands of Blaise d’Hautpoul, whose territory included Rennes. Blaise was an ancestor of François d’Hautpoul-Rennes, whose wife Marie de Nègre is believed to be at the origin of the mystery of Rennes-le-Château. Local legend says Paris was killed after refusing to tell where he had found the coins. What followed was a long fight between the Jansenist bishop of Alet Nicolas Pavillon, Blaise d’Hautpoul and the brothers Nicolas and François Fouquet. Nicolas was Louis XIVth’s treasurer, François became the bishop of Alet’s neighbour… Nicolas Fouquet wrote the famous letter to {his brother} describing a meeting with Poussin in Rome:
“He and I discussed certain things, which I shall with ease be able to explan to you in detail – things that will give you, through Monsieur Poussin, advantages which even kings would have great pains to draw from him, and which, according to him, it is possible that nobody else will ever be able to rediscover in the centuries to come. And, what is more, these are things so difficult to discover that nothing now on this earth can prove of better fortune nor be their equal”
Colbert, who succeeded Fouquet, then founded a mining company in the Languedoc with the intent of opening the mines on Blaise Hautpoul's land. In return, Blaise was made 'answerable to the King alone'. Chérisey seems to have referred to this before. In a work by Louis Vazart
Chérisey added a chapter which carried these paragraphs:
"The BEAUSOLEIL couple managed to persuade Louis XIV that there was a gold depot dépôt in ROCKO-NEGRO near Rennes-les-Bains, where stood the ruins of the famous Blanchefort castle belonging to Blaise I d’HAUPOUL. Nothing should have allowed the Royal power to dig up someone else's property. By chance, however, Blaise d’Haupoul had asked to reclaim the title of marquis de Blanchefort. Everything was set to proceed quickly on one side and very slowly on the other. In 1644, owing to Colbert's efforts, a team of German or Scandinavian miners landed at Rocko-Negro and started digging long tunnels which are still visible today. These workers spoke a language unknown to the occitans and lived in camps on the spot: discretion was thus assured.
Meanwhile, Blaise d’Haupoul is informed that all is well regarding the marquisat of Blanchefort could, but that he is discretely dispossessed of Rocko-Negro where stands the BLANCHEFORT castle. On January 4th 1669, the Haupouls are made Marquis de Blanchefort. The trick had been to baptise "château de Blanchefort" a mere pillbox measuring 2 by 3 m. at the top of a rock bearing the name Coume les Bains. The gold mining failed in 1667 and the miners decamped. In 1698, Abbé André-Hercule de Fleury, aged 46 and aumônier to the Queen, is offered Rocko-Negro with its mines and, as a bonus, the Bishopric of Fréjus. He will also become tutor to the future Louis XV and will thereafter be appointed Cardinal. His Eminence dies in 1743 and bequeaths all his estate to his sister Marie, wife of Bernardin de ROSSET, who receives the title of Duc de Fleury, as well as the land of Rocko-Negro. There is thus still hope of reopening the antique gold mines. Through a deed signed in Limoux on June 1st 1750, André-Hercule de Rosset, duc de Fleury, Pair of France, lieutenant-general in the King's army, governor of the city and citadel of STENAY, lieutenant-general of Lorraine and Barrois, seneschal of Limoux and Carcassonne, passed on to Jean XVIII des PLANTARD this famous Rocko-Negro. This famous Jean Plantard, it must be said, had married his niece, Madeleine de Rosset...
At the Révolution, through a deed signed in Limoux on February 6th 1792, the Plantards sell to the FLAMANDs the right to exploit the lands of ROC-NEGRE. Through another deed signed in Limoux on January 26th 1967, Pierre PLANTARD, buys back his property. In 1767, Gabrielle de Haupoul-Blanchefort marries Marquis Paul-Vincent de Fleury -just a homonym of Fleury, the Duke- who, through his wife, will come into possession of Bains de Rennes and Montferrand. So, the names of Stenay and Rennes are once more joined together through the Duke of FLEURY."
One wonders if the Pompeius stone and its finding contemporaneously with all the mining at Roc Negro in the decades that followed and as related by Chérisey as being the marker for the entrance to a tomb in Roc Negro are somehow connected. We must remember that the historian Catel mentioned this Pompeius stone [before 1626, when Catel died] in an historical work he had written and which was later published [1633]. He said that the stone had been found in the ancient ruins of the Bains de Rennes. Is there some sort of cross-over for this 'story'? Some confusion between versions regarding the finding of this Roman inscription/pedestal? Who knows? It is most likely though that Chérisey was playing games with all these ideas. And Plantard too. But was it for a joke or for something important?
Before we move on, there is also a slim connection between a Great Roman who is said to be buried in the area and Chérisey's above diagram. Cherisey links page 232 of the work of Boudet (La Vrai Langue Celtique) with a boundary stone (borne). Boudet had written:
"At the top of Bazel, we see very strange standing stones, which help to form the circle of the Cromleck on the eastern side. It is almost impossible to describe in detail these large stones as they are in considerable numbers, and their sum can easily be extended to three or four hundred arranged in order on the crest or lying confusedly on the slope facing south. One of these stones measuring more than eight feet long, two wide and as high: this mass of about thirty-two cubic meters was raised, tilted in a desired direction and secured to one end so that its enormous weight does not point on the steep slope of the mountain. One must see with his own eyes, this gigantic work, which causes amazement - no description can give an idea of what prodigious work it is".
On the map Chérisey draws attention to the word borne in relation to this page 232 of Boudet's book where the French word borne means: boundary stone; or milestone. On page 232 Boudet is indeed talking about a boundary stone, saying that;
"The locals are of the persuasion, very wrong indeed, that the Greek cross carved on the rocks represent points of demarcation/boundaries. The real stone marker, indicating the separation of land of Coustaussa and Rennes-les-Bains, is stuck in the ground twenty feet away, on the north-west side. This boundary stone is very curious, it focuses on the side facing Coustaussa, shield/badge (?), probably the lord of the village, and on the opposite side, another shield/badge, the Lord of Rennes, showing very large differences with the first....".
It is the mention of Coustaussa that alerts us to the tomb of a Great Roman. In the Sennier letter (see HERE) it is reported that:
"A memoire of Antoine Bigou, Cure of Rennes, dated 11th February 1781 (a month after the death of Marie de Negre d’Ables) was certified by Abbe Francois-Pierre Cauneille, Cure of Rennes les Bains. This memoire 'authenticates the discovery of the tomb of Constant I, by a young shepherdess of Bains, Catherine Planel, of the smallholding of Favies. It is this discovery which is the origin of the legend of the treasure of Blanchefort, which was reported by M. de Labouisse-Rochefort in his 'Voyage a Rennes-les-Bains'. (Paris 1932). Bigou patiently questioned the shepherdess - and from her directions was able to find the place of this tomb burial'. Here it is described that ‘our Abbè's [i.e. Bigou and Cauneille] had found the treasure of the Aniorts, namely the treasure of Alaric, hidden in the Valley of the Aude, after the fall of the Kingdom of Toulouse'. This treasure of the Aniorts was claimed to be buried in a necropolis which the priest's had refused to enter but who nevertheless took care to mark the place for later posterity. 'Constantine the Great (of the Labarum and of the Triumph of Christianity), Roman Emperor .... divided his Empire between his three sons..... the text [ie the Sennier letter] speaks about the whereabouts of the tomb of Constant I in the Razes area, identifying Elne'. The author states 'we think he [Constant I] was captured and assassinated at Coustaussa, because the most ancient name known of this village was Villa quae vocatur Constantium' (villa which is called Constantium).... also ...the second sign is the very ancient marble quarry situated 200 metres to the north of Peyro Dreto, the druidic stone of Pontils, in the commune of Peyrolles. From the dimensions of some of the blocks extracted, still visible today, we can deduce that these blocks were destined for a very important monument, and more, to be situated in the immediate area."
Elne as we already know is one of the villages in Septimania. Here we see it is linked with the murder of a son on Constantine the Great. He certainly would be a great Roman. Could he be the important Roman buried in the Rennes area? Now that we have seen all the Priory propaganda for the Roman history of Rennes-les-Bains and the identity of this important Roman ... what is the real history that we know?
So the mysterious Roman would appear to be Sextus Pompeius. But what was really so grand about him? Why would Milesian philosophers embalm his body which then becomes an object of veneration? Why would Chérisey say this 'Pompeius' was buried at Roc Negro? The issue becomes even more confusing when you look at what Chérisey wrote on the diagram. Quite in contradiction to other assertions he has made elsewhere, Chérisey writes in relation to this Pompeius stone that it is a:
"white marble stone, discovered in 1600 on the parcel of land A3 647 [or combination of numbers, it is difficult to make out on the text] of Roc Negro at Rennes-les-Bains, Aude. It marked the entry to the necropolis of the Grand Roman [?] Lucius Cneis [?] Pompeius Quartus"
Two things of note here. It would seem that this 'necropolis' at or around Roc Negro is the Temple Rond that both Plantard and Chérisey were fond of referring to. This Temple had some bearing on the creation of the second version of the Priory of Sion. This ‘version’ starts with its founder Jean-Timoleon Nègri d’Ables along with the help of Blaise d’Hautpoul (d.1694) and Abbé André-Hercule de Fleury (d.1743 and who is the brother of Marie de Fleury and who married February 1680 Bernardin de Rosset of Rocozels (? -1720), lord of Rocozels Bouloc and Ceilhes and whose later descendant was Paul-François-Vincent de Fleury). This Priory is said to be ‘a more or less direct successor of the Children of St Vincent and (probably) of the Company of the Blessed Sacrament founded in 1629 by Henri de Lévis’.
Blaise d’Hautpoul and Abbé André-Hercule de Fleury were involved at this time with the mines being opened up on Roc Negro which appears to me to have some significance regarding these family connections. These events may even be at the origin of the Hautpoul ‘treasure story’. It is said that ‘In the spring of 1645, a shepherd called Ignace Paris found an unknown quantity of golden coins on the lands of Blaise d’Hautpoul, whose territory included Rennes. Blaise was an ancestor of François d’Hautpoul-Rennes, whose wife Marie de Nègre is believed to be at the origin of the mystery of Rennes-le-Château. Local legend says Paris was killed after refusing to tell where he had found the coins. What followed was a long fight between the Jansenist bishop of Alet Nicolas Pavillon, Blaise d’Hautpoul and the brothers Nicolas and François Fouquet. Nicolas was Louis XIVth’s treasurer, François became the bishop of Alet’s neighbour… Nicolas Fouquet wrote the famous letter to {his brother} describing a meeting with Poussin in Rome:
“He and I discussed certain things, which I shall with ease be able to explan to you in detail – things that will give you, through Monsieur Poussin, advantages which even kings would have great pains to draw from him, and which, according to him, it is possible that nobody else will ever be able to rediscover in the centuries to come. And, what is more, these are things so difficult to discover that nothing now on this earth can prove of better fortune nor be their equal”
Colbert, who succeeded Fouquet, then founded a mining company in the Languedoc with the intent of opening the mines on Blaise Hautpoul's land. In return, Blaise was made 'answerable to the King alone'. Chérisey seems to have referred to this before. In a work by Louis Vazart
Chérisey added a chapter which carried these paragraphs:
"The BEAUSOLEIL couple managed to persuade Louis XIV that there was a gold depot dépôt in ROCKO-NEGRO near Rennes-les-Bains, where stood the ruins of the famous Blanchefort castle belonging to Blaise I d’HAUPOUL. Nothing should have allowed the Royal power to dig up someone else's property. By chance, however, Blaise d’Haupoul had asked to reclaim the title of marquis de Blanchefort. Everything was set to proceed quickly on one side and very slowly on the other. In 1644, owing to Colbert's efforts, a team of German or Scandinavian miners landed at Rocko-Negro and started digging long tunnels which are still visible today. These workers spoke a language unknown to the occitans and lived in camps on the spot: discretion was thus assured.
Meanwhile, Blaise d’Haupoul is informed that all is well regarding the marquisat of Blanchefort could, but that he is discretely dispossessed of Rocko-Negro where stands the BLANCHEFORT castle. On January 4th 1669, the Haupouls are made Marquis de Blanchefort. The trick had been to baptise "château de Blanchefort" a mere pillbox measuring 2 by 3 m. at the top of a rock bearing the name Coume les Bains. The gold mining failed in 1667 and the miners decamped. In 1698, Abbé André-Hercule de Fleury, aged 46 and aumônier to the Queen, is offered Rocko-Negro with its mines and, as a bonus, the Bishopric of Fréjus. He will also become tutor to the future Louis XV and will thereafter be appointed Cardinal. His Eminence dies in 1743 and bequeaths all his estate to his sister Marie, wife of Bernardin de ROSSET, who receives the title of Duc de Fleury, as well as the land of Rocko-Negro. There is thus still hope of reopening the antique gold mines. Through a deed signed in Limoux on June 1st 1750, André-Hercule de Rosset, duc de Fleury, Pair of France, lieutenant-general in the King's army, governor of the city and citadel of STENAY, lieutenant-general of Lorraine and Barrois, seneschal of Limoux and Carcassonne, passed on to Jean XVIII des PLANTARD this famous Rocko-Negro. This famous Jean Plantard, it must be said, had married his niece, Madeleine de Rosset...
At the Révolution, through a deed signed in Limoux on February 6th 1792, the Plantards sell to the FLAMANDs the right to exploit the lands of ROC-NEGRE. Through another deed signed in Limoux on January 26th 1967, Pierre PLANTARD, buys back his property. In 1767, Gabrielle de Haupoul-Blanchefort marries Marquis Paul-Vincent de Fleury -just a homonym of Fleury, the Duke- who, through his wife, will come into possession of Bains de Rennes and Montferrand. So, the names of Stenay and Rennes are once more joined together through the Duke of FLEURY."
One wonders if the Pompeius stone and its finding contemporaneously with all the mining at Roc Negro in the decades that followed and as related by Chérisey as being the marker for the entrance to a tomb in Roc Negro are somehow connected. We must remember that the historian Catel mentioned this Pompeius stone [before 1626, when Catel died] in an historical work he had written and which was later published [1633]. He said that the stone had been found in the ancient ruins of the Bains de Rennes. Is there some sort of cross-over for this 'story'? Some confusion between versions regarding the finding of this Roman inscription/pedestal? Who knows? It is most likely though that Chérisey was playing games with all these ideas. And Plantard too. But was it for a joke or for something important?
Before we move on, there is also a slim connection between a Great Roman who is said to be buried in the area and Chérisey's above diagram. Cherisey links page 232 of the work of Boudet (La Vrai Langue Celtique) with a boundary stone (borne). Boudet had written:
"At the top of Bazel, we see very strange standing stones, which help to form the circle of the Cromleck on the eastern side. It is almost impossible to describe in detail these large stones as they are in considerable numbers, and their sum can easily be extended to three or four hundred arranged in order on the crest or lying confusedly on the slope facing south. One of these stones measuring more than eight feet long, two wide and as high: this mass of about thirty-two cubic meters was raised, tilted in a desired direction and secured to one end so that its enormous weight does not point on the steep slope of the mountain. One must see with his own eyes, this gigantic work, which causes amazement - no description can give an idea of what prodigious work it is".
On the map Chérisey draws attention to the word borne in relation to this page 232 of Boudet's book where the French word borne means: boundary stone; or milestone. On page 232 Boudet is indeed talking about a boundary stone, saying that;
"The locals are of the persuasion, very wrong indeed, that the Greek cross carved on the rocks represent points of demarcation/boundaries. The real stone marker, indicating the separation of land of Coustaussa and Rennes-les-Bains, is stuck in the ground twenty feet away, on the north-west side. This boundary stone is very curious, it focuses on the side facing Coustaussa, shield/badge (?), probably the lord of the village, and on the opposite side, another shield/badge, the Lord of Rennes, showing very large differences with the first....".
It is the mention of Coustaussa that alerts us to the tomb of a Great Roman. In the Sennier letter (see HERE) it is reported that:
"A memoire of Antoine Bigou, Cure of Rennes, dated 11th February 1781 (a month after the death of Marie de Negre d’Ables) was certified by Abbe Francois-Pierre Cauneille, Cure of Rennes les Bains. This memoire 'authenticates the discovery of the tomb of Constant I, by a young shepherdess of Bains, Catherine Planel, of the smallholding of Favies. It is this discovery which is the origin of the legend of the treasure of Blanchefort, which was reported by M. de Labouisse-Rochefort in his 'Voyage a Rennes-les-Bains'. (Paris 1932). Bigou patiently questioned the shepherdess - and from her directions was able to find the place of this tomb burial'. Here it is described that ‘our Abbè's [i.e. Bigou and Cauneille] had found the treasure of the Aniorts, namely the treasure of Alaric, hidden in the Valley of the Aude, after the fall of the Kingdom of Toulouse'. This treasure of the Aniorts was claimed to be buried in a necropolis which the priest's had refused to enter but who nevertheless took care to mark the place for later posterity. 'Constantine the Great (of the Labarum and of the Triumph of Christianity), Roman Emperor .... divided his Empire between his three sons..... the text [ie the Sennier letter] speaks about the whereabouts of the tomb of Constant I in the Razes area, identifying Elne'. The author states 'we think he [Constant I] was captured and assassinated at Coustaussa, because the most ancient name known of this village was Villa quae vocatur Constantium' (villa which is called Constantium).... also ...the second sign is the very ancient marble quarry situated 200 metres to the north of Peyro Dreto, the druidic stone of Pontils, in the commune of Peyrolles. From the dimensions of some of the blocks extracted, still visible today, we can deduce that these blocks were destined for a very important monument, and more, to be situated in the immediate area."
Elne as we already know is one of the villages in Septimania. Here we see it is linked with the murder of a son on Constantine the Great. He certainly would be a great Roman. Could he be the important Roman buried in the Rennes area? Now that we have seen all the Priory propaganda for the Roman history of Rennes-les-Bains and the identity of this important Roman ... what is the real history that we know?
Delmas also says that the 'period when these colonies were established in the Languedoc, which was the land of the Tectosages, can be established after the time when Quintus Fabius Maximus, after having suppressed the Salians, conquered the Arecomiques and [then] went to reduce the Tectosages, who were from this land of Bains. Augustus Caesar then completed the conquest of the country and for some time settled in Narbonne'. The strange thing is that all these names that Delmas mention in regards to the 'founding' of Rennes-les-Bains, the veteran soldiers who lived there and the particular Roman burial that there might be evidence of are indeed all related to each other in historical terms.
So what is that historical reality?
NARBONNE
Any reconstructed history starts really with the colonisation by the Romans of Narbonne. Before this time, the area we are interested in was settled by one Celtic group. This was the Volcae, and one of its sub-groups the Tectosages. According to Wikipedia;
"The Tectosagii were a sept of the Volcae who moved through Macedonia into Asia Minor c. 270 BCE. Strabo says the Tectosagii came originally from the region near modern Toulouse, in France. West of the Arecomici the Volcae Tectosages (whose territory included that of the Tolosates) lived among the Aquitanians; the territories were separated by the Hérault River (Arauris) or a line between the Hérault River and the Orbe River (Orbis). The territory of the Volcae Tectosages (Οὐόλκαι Τεκτόσαγες of Ptolemy's Geography ii) lay outside the Roman Republic, to the southwest of the Volcae Arecomici. From the 3rd century BC, the capital city of the Volcae Tectosages was Tolosa(modern Toulouse). When the Cimbri and Teutones invaded Gaul, the Tectosages allied themselves with them, and their town Tolosa was sacked in retribution by Quintus Servilius Caepio in 106 BC. Tolosa was incorporated into the Roman Republic as part of the province of Gallia Aquitania with the conquest of Gaul by Julius Caesar in 52 BC. The Roman conquest of Tolosa ended the cultural identity of the Volcae Tectosages.
According to Ptolemy's Geography, their inland towns were Illiberis [Elne], Ruscino [Perpignan], Tolosa colonia, Cessero [Saint Thibery], Carcaso, Baetirae, and Narbon colonia.
The Volcae Tectosages were among the successful raiders of the Delphi expedition and were said to have transported their booty to Tolosa. Venceslas Kruta suggests that their movement into this region was probably motivated by a Carthaginian recruiting-post situated close by, a main attraction of the region for Celtic mercenaries eager for more campaigning".
It seems from these texts that the Tectosages were the original inhabitants of what later became Septimania. And in fact, the end of the cultural identity of these Tectosages and their incorporation into the Roman world occurred in 106-5BC, when Q. Servilius Caepio was sent with an army to put down a revolt of the Tectosages, and as a result, Tolosa was sacked, and thereafter the town and its territory became absorbed into the Roman Province. A few years earlier Narbonne had been established [in 118 BC], as Colonia Narbo Martius. It was located on the Via Domitia, the first Roman road in Gaul, built at the time of the foundation of the colony, and connected Italy to Spain. In a matter of twelve years later, the Romans controlled the whole of Southern Gaul.
We have seen that it was the Tenth and Seventh Legion veterans that settled in Narbonne and the lands that later became Septimania. What are their histories?
The Seventh
With the eighth, ninth and tenth legions, the Seventh was among the oldest units in the imperial Roman army. They were with Julius Caesar when he invaded Gaul in 58 BCE. The legion was said to have been created by Pomepy in 68BC. However we do not know if these legions were raised from the three Picenean legions his father raised. But i suspect they were.
Pompey Strabo, Pompeys father, raised these legions in response to growing unrest in Italy between the State of Rome and local indigenous people of Italy who were losing out and becoming poorer and poorer at the expense of the state. This was because the Roman policy of land distribution to its veteran soldiers at the expense of these local landowners and indigenous populations had led to great inequality of land-ownership and wealth. A number of political proposals had been attempted to address the growing discrepancy whereby Italians made a significant contribution to Roman's military force, while receiving disproportionately small shares of land and citizenship rights. These efforts came to a head under the impetus of Drusus. His reforms would have granted the local Italians Roman citizenship and greater say in what would happen to them. The response of the Roman senatorial elite to Drusus' proposals were to reject his ideas and assassinate him. This inflamed the Italians, who went to war.
Pompeys father, Strabo, fought on the side of the Romans and in the North of the country. He was then a Roman consul and he successfully besieged Asculum. Interestingly Quintus Servilius Caepio the Younger was killed during these wars [he fought on the side of the Roman Republic, i.s. a colleague of Strabo. His father was Quintus Servilius Caepio the Elder, the very same who marched on Tolosa and sacked it, where a story was told of this semi-legendary treasure, the aurum Tolosanum, supposedly the "cursed gold" looted during the sack of Delphi during the Gallic invasion of the Balkans in 279 BC. The riches of Tolosa were shipped back to Rome, but only the silver made it; the gold was stolen by a band of marauders, who were believed to have been hired by Caepio himself. The Gold of Tolosa was never found, and was said to have been passed all the way down to the last heir of the Servilii
Caepiones, Marcus Junius Brutus, who is best known for his role in the assassination of Caesar. His father was killed by Pompey the Great].
Whatever the make-up of the Seventh legion, it was created before Pompey went to the East. By this time Pompey had already campaigned in Africa, Sicily and Italy. He asked for the
post of Consular imperium in Hispania [it meant the 'power to command'] to deal with the populares general Quintus Sertorius, who had held out for the past three years against Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius, one of Sulla's most able generals. The Roman aristocracy turned him down – they were beginning to fear the young, popular and successful general. Pompey resorted to his tried and tested persuasion; he refused to disband his legions until his request was granted. Getting his own way Pompey headed off to Hispania and remained there from 76 – 71 BC; finally, Pompey managed to crush the populares when Sertorius was murdered by his own officer. By early 71, the whole of Hispania was subdued. Pompey showed a talent for efficient organisation and fair administration in the conquered province; this extended his patronage throughout Hispania and into southern Gaul. Pompey then set off for Italy from Hispania and Gaul, and he must have taken the route Via Domitia.
In the East Pompey was to take part in the Third Mithridatic War. It was fought between Mithridates VI of Pontus and his allies and the Roman Republic. He defeated Mithridates, and in 64BC Pompey marched into Syria. He killed Antiochus ending the Seleucid dynasty. In Judea, Pompey intervened in the civil war between Hyrcanus II, who supported the Pharisee faction and Aristobulus II, who supported the Sadducees. The armies of Pompey and Hyrcanus II laid siege to Jerusalem. After three months, the city fell.
"Of the Jews there fell twelve thousand, but of the Romans very few.... and no small enormities were committed about the temple itself, which, in former ages, had been inaccessible, and seen by none; for Pompey went into it, and not a few of those that were with him also, and saw all that which it was unlawful for any other men to see but only for the high priests. There were in that temple the golden table, the holy candlestick, and the pouring vessels, and a great quantity of spices; and besides these there were among the treasures two thousand talents of sacred money: yet did Pompey touch nothing of all this, on account of his regard to religion; and in this point also he acted in a manner that was worthy of his virtue. The next day he gave order to those that had the charge of the temple to cleanse it, and to bring what offerings the law required to God; and restored the high priesthood to Hyrcanus, both because he had been useful to him in other respects, and because he hindered the Jews in the country from giving Aristobulus any assistance in his war against him." (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, book 14, chapter 4; tr. by William Whiston, available at Project Gutenberg.)
Although Pompey and Crassus distrusted each other, Crassus' tax farming clients were being rebuffed at the same time Pompey's veterans were being ignored, and by 61 BC, their grievances had pushed them both into an alliance with Caesar, six years younger than Pompey, returning from service in Hispania and ready to seek the consulship for 59 BC. Their political alliance, known subsequently as the First Triumvirate, operated to the benefit of each. Pompey and Crassus would make Caesar Consul, and Caesar would use his consular power to promote their claims.
Caesar's consulship of 59 BC brought Pompey land for his veterans, confirmation of his Asian political settlements and a new wife. She was Caesar's daughter, Julia; Pompey was said to be besotted by her. Pompey was given the governorship of Hispania Ulterior. Later, Julius Caesar and Pompey would become enemies [after previously being friends and welded together by family ties]. Eventually this led to the murder of Pompey.
We have seen that this Seventh legion was settled in the area of Beziers in 36BC. Pompey, who had raised the Legion died in 48BC. There is evidence that the Legion, after Pompey's death, was used by Caesar, and then later by Octavian. The legion was probably active during Octavian's wars against Sextus Pompeius, who had occupied Sicily, and may have been present when Octavian clashed with Marc Antony at Actium. Later, veterans were settled in Mauretania as well. Octavian became the first emperor of Rome, and seems to have transferred the seventh legion to Galatia, although a stay at the Balkans is perhaps just as likely.
There is some evidence that Caesar also had dealings with the Seventh Legion. When Julius Caesar arrived as Governor in the province of Baetica or Hispania Ulterior (Farther Spain), as it was in 61 BC, he immediately decided to subdue the West and Northwest areas (modern day Portugal). He already had two legions based in the province, the 8th and 9th legions, which had been enlisted by Pompey in 65 BC. Caesar needed a third legion for his planned campaign and so he immediately enlisted a new legion, the 10th legion. At the beginning of the Gallic campaign, Caesar brought the 10th legion from Spain (with the 7th, 8th and 9th legions). Almost immediately, in the summer of 58 BC the legion fought in two major actions, the Battles of Arar and Bibracte. They played a central part in Caesar's defeat of the Helvetii tribes, preventing their migration from present day Switzerland to western France. In 45 BC the legion was disbanded, and the veterans obtained lands in Narbonne, southern Gaul.
We can see that actually the Seventh and Tenth legions have a long history and allied to two main players, Caesar and Pompey.
Other Information
There is other information put forward by Delmas which is also of interest. For example, he asserted that the period when the colonies were established [at Narbonne and Beziers, and by extension Rennes-les-Bains] could be dated only until after the time of Quintus Fabius Maximus. He was was a general and politician of the late Roman Republic who became suffect consul in 45 BC. In 46 BC, he was one of Julius Caesar's legates who fought in the civil war. Maximus was sent by Caesar to Hispania along with Quintus Pedius in command of the troops sent from Sardinia to deal with the Pompeians, who were led by Gnaeus Pompeius [the elder son of Pompey the Great].
Other historians such as Guibal asserted that the colonisation of Beziers took place under the leadership of one Fonteius, who led the Seventh Legion. This Fonteius - was a Roman praetor, about 75 B.C. His timeline is as follows;
84/32 M.Fonteius' upright behaviour as quaestor.
81/70 M.Fonteius is sent on a mission to further Spain.
77/21 Claudius and his legate Fonteius defend Macedonia against raids
74/3 Fonteius leaves Rome for Gaul.
73/1 Gaul, where supplies are provided to him by the governor Fonteius.
72/55 Fonteius impoverishes the province of Gaul by his exactions.
69/24 Cicero's speech in defence of M.Fonteius.
Others have suggested that the earliest Roman colonies were instigated under Lucius Porcinus Cato and Quintus Marcius Rex. Lucius Porcius Cato was a Roman general and politician who became consul in 89 BC alongside Gnaeus Pompeius Strabo[the father of Pompey the Great]. He died at the Battle of Fucine Lake, possibly at the hands of Gaius Marius the Younger. Quintus Marcius Rex was a consul of the Roman Republic. He was the grandson of another Quintus Marcius Rex, the consul of 118 BC. He was elected consul for 68 BC with Lucius Caecilius Metellus. Caecilius Metellus died near the start of the year and was not replaced. Marcius went to serve in Cilicia as proconsul and, pressured by his brother-in-law, Publius Clodius, refused to help Lucius Licinius Lucullus. He gave up his province in 66 BC to comply with the lex Manilia that gave command of the provinces of the east to Pompey the Great.
Finally, based on some inscriptions found at Beziers itself [as well as Narbonne], historian
Pierre Andoque advanced the theory that Beziers was created under the instructions from the father of the Emperor Tiberius himself. This was Tiberius Claudius Nero, often known as Tiberius Nero and Nero (85 BC-33 BC). He was a politician that lived in the last century of the Roman Republic. Nero had served as a quaestor to Julius Caesar in 48 BC, commanding his fleet in the Alexandrian War. Having achieved victory over the Egyptian navy, he was rewarded with a Priesthood. Julius Caesar had sent Nero to create Roman colonies in Gaul and in other provinces [according to Suetonius] . When the Second Triumvirate began to break down, causing a dangerous situation in Rome as the triumvirs went to battle with each other. Nero was forced to choose sides and in his distrust of Octavian, he cast his lot with Mark Antony. In 41 BC, he fled Rome with Livia and Tiberius in tow, joining Antony's brother Lucius in Perusia. Perusia was besieged by Octavian's men by the time Nero arrived, and when the town fell in 40 BC, he was forced to flee first to Praeneste, and then Naples. In 40 BC, Octavian and Mark Antony finally reconciled. In Naples, Nero tried in vain to raise a slave battalion against Octavian and then took refuge with Sextus Pompey, who was then acting as a pirate leader in Sicily.
Conclusions
What has been interesting during this cursory research is that the Pompeius family were quite significant and during various times of their careers were in league with important men of the age, including Julius Caesar, later Roman Emperors and others. Their ties were often political as well as by families as they inter-married and built alliances in this manner too. What is more these people, in various ways, are connected to the legends of the Gold of Toulouse, the treasure of the Jews and actually, if legends about Mary Magdalene coming to France are true - then why not Narbonne or Beziers or Rennes-les-Bains, considering these colonies, according to Seutonius were created by Emperor Tiberius and his family, particularly his father! Chronologically it fits the time frame of the events happening around Judea in the early 30's AD. Why not a Roman colony created by Tiberius's is father?
In relation to the Pompeius stone and the writings of Cherisey et al and the priest Delmas it might be pertinent to ask if these people really believed in an important burial of any one of these Romans in the vicinity, in a colony created by a Roman legion? It really would seem that the Pompeius family had strong links with Gaul and Hispania, as did Ceasar. Perhaps these legends and whispers of an important tomb could in fact be the last whispers from the legionaries themselves, when they settled in their lands and told tales of their exploits in the Roman Army. They told their children about the treasures they had seen, the famous people and the gold. And these tales became the local folklore of the region.
Or is the Roman stone important to Delmas etc for some other reason? It is the strangest enigma. It is of course entirely possible that these 'legends' have been created to conceal knowledge of another ancient burial in the area. It must be considered a possibility. Is the burial related to the important burial that Boudet refers to in his La Vrai Langue Celtique? This again seems entirely possible. This then is as far as we can go. Unless someone furnishes us with new information or if indeed, an archaeological discovery is made, i fear we cannot go any further with this scenario.
So what is that historical reality?
NARBONNE
Any reconstructed history starts really with the colonisation by the Romans of Narbonne. Before this time, the area we are interested in was settled by one Celtic group. This was the Volcae, and one of its sub-groups the Tectosages. According to Wikipedia;
"The Tectosagii were a sept of the Volcae who moved through Macedonia into Asia Minor c. 270 BCE. Strabo says the Tectosagii came originally from the region near modern Toulouse, in France. West of the Arecomici the Volcae Tectosages (whose territory included that of the Tolosates) lived among the Aquitanians; the territories were separated by the Hérault River (Arauris) or a line between the Hérault River and the Orbe River (Orbis). The territory of the Volcae Tectosages (Οὐόλκαι Τεκτόσαγες of Ptolemy's Geography ii) lay outside the Roman Republic, to the southwest of the Volcae Arecomici. From the 3rd century BC, the capital city of the Volcae Tectosages was Tolosa(modern Toulouse). When the Cimbri and Teutones invaded Gaul, the Tectosages allied themselves with them, and their town Tolosa was sacked in retribution by Quintus Servilius Caepio in 106 BC. Tolosa was incorporated into the Roman Republic as part of the province of Gallia Aquitania with the conquest of Gaul by Julius Caesar in 52 BC. The Roman conquest of Tolosa ended the cultural identity of the Volcae Tectosages.
According to Ptolemy's Geography, their inland towns were Illiberis [Elne], Ruscino [Perpignan], Tolosa colonia, Cessero [Saint Thibery], Carcaso, Baetirae, and Narbon colonia.
The Volcae Tectosages were among the successful raiders of the Delphi expedition and were said to have transported their booty to Tolosa. Venceslas Kruta suggests that their movement into this region was probably motivated by a Carthaginian recruiting-post situated close by, a main attraction of the region for Celtic mercenaries eager for more campaigning".
It seems from these texts that the Tectosages were the original inhabitants of what later became Septimania. And in fact, the end of the cultural identity of these Tectosages and their incorporation into the Roman world occurred in 106-5BC, when Q. Servilius Caepio was sent with an army to put down a revolt of the Tectosages, and as a result, Tolosa was sacked, and thereafter the town and its territory became absorbed into the Roman Province. A few years earlier Narbonne had been established [in 118 BC], as Colonia Narbo Martius. It was located on the Via Domitia, the first Roman road in Gaul, built at the time of the foundation of the colony, and connected Italy to Spain. In a matter of twelve years later, the Romans controlled the whole of Southern Gaul.
We have seen that it was the Tenth and Seventh Legion veterans that settled in Narbonne and the lands that later became Septimania. What are their histories?
The Seventh
With the eighth, ninth and tenth legions, the Seventh was among the oldest units in the imperial Roman army. They were with Julius Caesar when he invaded Gaul in 58 BCE. The legion was said to have been created by Pomepy in 68BC. However we do not know if these legions were raised from the three Picenean legions his father raised. But i suspect they were.
Pompey Strabo, Pompeys father, raised these legions in response to growing unrest in Italy between the State of Rome and local indigenous people of Italy who were losing out and becoming poorer and poorer at the expense of the state. This was because the Roman policy of land distribution to its veteran soldiers at the expense of these local landowners and indigenous populations had led to great inequality of land-ownership and wealth. A number of political proposals had been attempted to address the growing discrepancy whereby Italians made a significant contribution to Roman's military force, while receiving disproportionately small shares of land and citizenship rights. These efforts came to a head under the impetus of Drusus. His reforms would have granted the local Italians Roman citizenship and greater say in what would happen to them. The response of the Roman senatorial elite to Drusus' proposals were to reject his ideas and assassinate him. This inflamed the Italians, who went to war.
Pompeys father, Strabo, fought on the side of the Romans and in the North of the country. He was then a Roman consul and he successfully besieged Asculum. Interestingly Quintus Servilius Caepio the Younger was killed during these wars [he fought on the side of the Roman Republic, i.s. a colleague of Strabo. His father was Quintus Servilius Caepio the Elder, the very same who marched on Tolosa and sacked it, where a story was told of this semi-legendary treasure, the aurum Tolosanum, supposedly the "cursed gold" looted during the sack of Delphi during the Gallic invasion of the Balkans in 279 BC. The riches of Tolosa were shipped back to Rome, but only the silver made it; the gold was stolen by a band of marauders, who were believed to have been hired by Caepio himself. The Gold of Tolosa was never found, and was said to have been passed all the way down to the last heir of the Servilii
Caepiones, Marcus Junius Brutus, who is best known for his role in the assassination of Caesar. His father was killed by Pompey the Great].
Whatever the make-up of the Seventh legion, it was created before Pompey went to the East. By this time Pompey had already campaigned in Africa, Sicily and Italy. He asked for the
post of Consular imperium in Hispania [it meant the 'power to command'] to deal with the populares general Quintus Sertorius, who had held out for the past three years against Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius, one of Sulla's most able generals. The Roman aristocracy turned him down – they were beginning to fear the young, popular and successful general. Pompey resorted to his tried and tested persuasion; he refused to disband his legions until his request was granted. Getting his own way Pompey headed off to Hispania and remained there from 76 – 71 BC; finally, Pompey managed to crush the populares when Sertorius was murdered by his own officer. By early 71, the whole of Hispania was subdued. Pompey showed a talent for efficient organisation and fair administration in the conquered province; this extended his patronage throughout Hispania and into southern Gaul. Pompey then set off for Italy from Hispania and Gaul, and he must have taken the route Via Domitia.
In the East Pompey was to take part in the Third Mithridatic War. It was fought between Mithridates VI of Pontus and his allies and the Roman Republic. He defeated Mithridates, and in 64BC Pompey marched into Syria. He killed Antiochus ending the Seleucid dynasty. In Judea, Pompey intervened in the civil war between Hyrcanus II, who supported the Pharisee faction and Aristobulus II, who supported the Sadducees. The armies of Pompey and Hyrcanus II laid siege to Jerusalem. After three months, the city fell.
"Of the Jews there fell twelve thousand, but of the Romans very few.... and no small enormities were committed about the temple itself, which, in former ages, had been inaccessible, and seen by none; for Pompey went into it, and not a few of those that were with him also, and saw all that which it was unlawful for any other men to see but only for the high priests. There were in that temple the golden table, the holy candlestick, and the pouring vessels, and a great quantity of spices; and besides these there were among the treasures two thousand talents of sacred money: yet did Pompey touch nothing of all this, on account of his regard to religion; and in this point also he acted in a manner that was worthy of his virtue. The next day he gave order to those that had the charge of the temple to cleanse it, and to bring what offerings the law required to God; and restored the high priesthood to Hyrcanus, both because he had been useful to him in other respects, and because he hindered the Jews in the country from giving Aristobulus any assistance in his war against him." (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, book 14, chapter 4; tr. by William Whiston, available at Project Gutenberg.)
Although Pompey and Crassus distrusted each other, Crassus' tax farming clients were being rebuffed at the same time Pompey's veterans were being ignored, and by 61 BC, their grievances had pushed them both into an alliance with Caesar, six years younger than Pompey, returning from service in Hispania and ready to seek the consulship for 59 BC. Their political alliance, known subsequently as the First Triumvirate, operated to the benefit of each. Pompey and Crassus would make Caesar Consul, and Caesar would use his consular power to promote their claims.
Caesar's consulship of 59 BC brought Pompey land for his veterans, confirmation of his Asian political settlements and a new wife. She was Caesar's daughter, Julia; Pompey was said to be besotted by her. Pompey was given the governorship of Hispania Ulterior. Later, Julius Caesar and Pompey would become enemies [after previously being friends and welded together by family ties]. Eventually this led to the murder of Pompey.
We have seen that this Seventh legion was settled in the area of Beziers in 36BC. Pompey, who had raised the Legion died in 48BC. There is evidence that the Legion, after Pompey's death, was used by Caesar, and then later by Octavian. The legion was probably active during Octavian's wars against Sextus Pompeius, who had occupied Sicily, and may have been present when Octavian clashed with Marc Antony at Actium. Later, veterans were settled in Mauretania as well. Octavian became the first emperor of Rome, and seems to have transferred the seventh legion to Galatia, although a stay at the Balkans is perhaps just as likely.
There is some evidence that Caesar also had dealings with the Seventh Legion. When Julius Caesar arrived as Governor in the province of Baetica or Hispania Ulterior (Farther Spain), as it was in 61 BC, he immediately decided to subdue the West and Northwest areas (modern day Portugal). He already had two legions based in the province, the 8th and 9th legions, which had been enlisted by Pompey in 65 BC. Caesar needed a third legion for his planned campaign and so he immediately enlisted a new legion, the 10th legion. At the beginning of the Gallic campaign, Caesar brought the 10th legion from Spain (with the 7th, 8th and 9th legions). Almost immediately, in the summer of 58 BC the legion fought in two major actions, the Battles of Arar and Bibracte. They played a central part in Caesar's defeat of the Helvetii tribes, preventing their migration from present day Switzerland to western France. In 45 BC the legion was disbanded, and the veterans obtained lands in Narbonne, southern Gaul.
We can see that actually the Seventh and Tenth legions have a long history and allied to two main players, Caesar and Pompey.
Other Information
There is other information put forward by Delmas which is also of interest. For example, he asserted that the period when the colonies were established [at Narbonne and Beziers, and by extension Rennes-les-Bains] could be dated only until after the time of Quintus Fabius Maximus. He was was a general and politician of the late Roman Republic who became suffect consul in 45 BC. In 46 BC, he was one of Julius Caesar's legates who fought in the civil war. Maximus was sent by Caesar to Hispania along with Quintus Pedius in command of the troops sent from Sardinia to deal with the Pompeians, who were led by Gnaeus Pompeius [the elder son of Pompey the Great].
Other historians such as Guibal asserted that the colonisation of Beziers took place under the leadership of one Fonteius, who led the Seventh Legion. This Fonteius - was a Roman praetor, about 75 B.C. His timeline is as follows;
84/32 M.Fonteius' upright behaviour as quaestor.
81/70 M.Fonteius is sent on a mission to further Spain.
77/21 Claudius and his legate Fonteius defend Macedonia against raids
74/3 Fonteius leaves Rome for Gaul.
73/1 Gaul, where supplies are provided to him by the governor Fonteius.
72/55 Fonteius impoverishes the province of Gaul by his exactions.
69/24 Cicero's speech in defence of M.Fonteius.
Others have suggested that the earliest Roman colonies were instigated under Lucius Porcinus Cato and Quintus Marcius Rex. Lucius Porcius Cato was a Roman general and politician who became consul in 89 BC alongside Gnaeus Pompeius Strabo[the father of Pompey the Great]. He died at the Battle of Fucine Lake, possibly at the hands of Gaius Marius the Younger. Quintus Marcius Rex was a consul of the Roman Republic. He was the grandson of another Quintus Marcius Rex, the consul of 118 BC. He was elected consul for 68 BC with Lucius Caecilius Metellus. Caecilius Metellus died near the start of the year and was not replaced. Marcius went to serve in Cilicia as proconsul and, pressured by his brother-in-law, Publius Clodius, refused to help Lucius Licinius Lucullus. He gave up his province in 66 BC to comply with the lex Manilia that gave command of the provinces of the east to Pompey the Great.
Finally, based on some inscriptions found at Beziers itself [as well as Narbonne], historian
Pierre Andoque advanced the theory that Beziers was created under the instructions from the father of the Emperor Tiberius himself. This was Tiberius Claudius Nero, often known as Tiberius Nero and Nero (85 BC-33 BC). He was a politician that lived in the last century of the Roman Republic. Nero had served as a quaestor to Julius Caesar in 48 BC, commanding his fleet in the Alexandrian War. Having achieved victory over the Egyptian navy, he was rewarded with a Priesthood. Julius Caesar had sent Nero to create Roman colonies in Gaul and in other provinces [according to Suetonius] . When the Second Triumvirate began to break down, causing a dangerous situation in Rome as the triumvirs went to battle with each other. Nero was forced to choose sides and in his distrust of Octavian, he cast his lot with Mark Antony. In 41 BC, he fled Rome with Livia and Tiberius in tow, joining Antony's brother Lucius in Perusia. Perusia was besieged by Octavian's men by the time Nero arrived, and when the town fell in 40 BC, he was forced to flee first to Praeneste, and then Naples. In 40 BC, Octavian and Mark Antony finally reconciled. In Naples, Nero tried in vain to raise a slave battalion against Octavian and then took refuge with Sextus Pompey, who was then acting as a pirate leader in Sicily.
Conclusions
What has been interesting during this cursory research is that the Pompeius family were quite significant and during various times of their careers were in league with important men of the age, including Julius Caesar, later Roman Emperors and others. Their ties were often political as well as by families as they inter-married and built alliances in this manner too. What is more these people, in various ways, are connected to the legends of the Gold of Toulouse, the treasure of the Jews and actually, if legends about Mary Magdalene coming to France are true - then why not Narbonne or Beziers or Rennes-les-Bains, considering these colonies, according to Seutonius were created by Emperor Tiberius and his family, particularly his father! Chronologically it fits the time frame of the events happening around Judea in the early 30's AD. Why not a Roman colony created by Tiberius's is father?
In relation to the Pompeius stone and the writings of Cherisey et al and the priest Delmas it might be pertinent to ask if these people really believed in an important burial of any one of these Romans in the vicinity, in a colony created by a Roman legion? It really would seem that the Pompeius family had strong links with Gaul and Hispania, as did Ceasar. Perhaps these legends and whispers of an important tomb could in fact be the last whispers from the legionaries themselves, when they settled in their lands and told tales of their exploits in the Roman Army. They told their children about the treasures they had seen, the famous people and the gold. And these tales became the local folklore of the region.
Or is the Roman stone important to Delmas etc for some other reason? It is the strangest enigma. It is of course entirely possible that these 'legends' have been created to conceal knowledge of another ancient burial in the area. It must be considered a possibility. Is the burial related to the important burial that Boudet refers to in his La Vrai Langue Celtique? This again seems entirely possible. This then is as far as we can go. Unless someone furnishes us with new information or if indeed, an archaeological discovery is made, i fear we cannot go any further with this scenario.