The Underground Stream
and Rene d'Anjou's Arcadia
Rene's masterpiece, Le Livre du Cueur d'Amours Espris, was written in 1457. Folio 15, often thought as denoting the theme of Arcadia with its iconic tomb and stream.
In 1995 Dr. Michael Hewitt-Gleeson wrote;
"For many years the Western mind had access to only one source of thinking. Thinking was pre-packaged and served as "absolute truth" and all of education consisted merely of learning the thinking as it was served and repeating it verbatim. Any attempt to do one's own thinking, or to explore ideas creatively, or to try to improve them, was ruthlessly persecuted as heresy. Millions were bullied and at least a million (mostly women) were roasted or drowned by the Inquisition, even the powerful Knights Templar were crushed. This infamous period of Western history became known as The Dark Ages.
Then, in 1408, one of the most important figures in European culture was born - Rene d'Anjou - "Good King Rene " as he was called, Head of the Royal House of Anjou (Maison Royale d'Anjou). During his life this amazing French nobleman held many titles, the most important were: Count of Provence; Duke of Calabria; Duke of Anjou; Duke of Lorraine; King of Hungary; King of Naples and Sicily; King of Aragon; and most resonant of all, King of Jerusalem. Rene was less a warrior than a thinker. He was a man ahead of his time anticipating the cultured Italian princes of the Renaissance. An extremely literate man, he composed poetry, mystical allegories and even illustrated his own books. The best compendiums of tournament rules were also written by Rene. It was Rene d'Anjou who broke the monopoly on the ownership and dissemination of thinking. This feat began a program for the advancement of knowledge which changed the course of history right up until the present day. Rene, criticised, even threatened by elitists for selling thinking, started the phenomenon we now call the Renaissance.
Using his numerous Italian possessions as a base of operations, Rene spent many years in Italy and became the greatest thinking salesman of all time. He inspired sponsorship from the
ruling Sforza family of Milan and his friend Cosimo de Medici and he got them to send their agents all over the world in quest of ancient manuscripts. As a result, in 1444, Cosimo opened Europe's first public library!! The Library of San Marco now made available, for the first time, the thinking and ideas that had been suppressed for centuries. Translations of Platonic, Neo-Platonic, Pythagorea, Gnostic and Hermetic thought were now readily accessible at last.
This first public library burst apart the thinking cartel of the Dark Ages! Cosimo also instructed the University of Florence to begin teaching Greek for the first time in Europe for seven hundred years. He established many academies throughout Italy which sought to add value to the knowledge that existed by freedom of thought, exploration and research, and the general improvement of thinking as it then stood. This operation to improve the quality of thinking was successful. It broke the Church's monopoly on thinking and the new "quest for excellence" became the theme for the high culture of the Renaissance which rapidly began to blossom." (http://kingrene.guice.org/renesales.html).
René I of Anjou thus was a tolerant and open man, interested in a plurality of thinking styles. He was steeped in esoteric tradition. His court included a wise Jewish astrologer, Cabalist and physician known as Jean de Saint-Remy who was the grandfather of Nostradamus. Also, for some time, René employed the great Italian Admiral, Christopher Columbus. It is of interest that both of Nostradamus' Grandfathers were Court physicians to King René along with the father of Leonardo Da Vinci.
The origins of the specific ‘Arcadia’ theme that Western culture later adopted and to which Poussin was an heir in the later Middle Ages can be traced back to René. This Arcadian theme of his included an underground stream and a tomb that connoted aspects of a ‘secret tradition’ or elements of a ‘secret knowledge’. And this ‘Arcadian’ theme was promulgated by artists throughout the Renaissance and beyond. Was René the source of this particular Arcadian theme, and perhaps the originator of that enigmatic phrase of Et in Arcadia Ego? For we do know he composed mottos!
If he was the originator of the mysterious 'underground stream' motif, that of 'hidden' knowledge, then what was its importance for him? Was it related to the geographical Arcadia? Or was René utilising this 'secret' knowledge or tradition for his own personal reasons? Was it to his efforts to reduce the strangle hold that the orthodox church had on learning and education and truth at the time? Did he want to present to humanity knowledge unknown to the mass populace by his attempt to encourage collection of all manner of ancient manuscripts through his illustrious connections (e.g the Medici's etc)? Or was it perhaps a combination of both these ideas?
I think that René was using his theme of Arcadia in a particular way. In the above illustration of a folio page from his well-known work Le Livre du Cueur d'Amours Espris we see 'Cueur is standing in front of the marble slab, gravely reading the inscription which he had not been able to see the night before'. The inscription reads;
Beneath this marble shaft,
as black as coal, rises the Spring of Chance.*
He who drinks of it will suffer dire misery.
For this spring was brought forth by the sorcerer Vergil,
who laid his curse upon it.
A little of its water, poured on this marble shaft,
will instantly unleash a raging storm.
(* La Fontaine de fortune - but fortune in its negative, shifting, treacherous aspects. There are, however, positives to a fountain of water/a spring of chance/fate image - and that is the fountain of redeeming waters - an echo of “Whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst,” and "... the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life” (John 4:14). They are the rivers of the Word Himself in John 7:37-39, “If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink,” said Jesus. ”He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water”).
Had this river, this spring, accursed by Virgil, been adopted by Rene for other reasons?
For René the tomb in his idyllic pastoral landscape sits over the 'spring of chance', and running away from the side of the tomb is indeed a kind of channel from which the water flows. This baneful spring flows on to become a brook, a Stream of Tears which Cueur and Desire will encounter repeatedly as they journey onward. The grim inscription, prophesying misery and danger ahead, is the one black note in a painting otherwise expressive only of the radiance of a joyful new morning.
The above inscription on the tomb about a curse brought forth by Virgil on a stream seems to relate to Virgil and his first poem, known as the Eclogues (written 37 B.C.E). In particular Verse 5 which refers to the death of Daphnis:
""For Daphnis cruelly slain wept all the Nymphs-
Ye hazels, bear them witness, and ye streams-
When she, his mother, clasping in her arms
The hapless body of the son she bare,
To gods and stars unpitying, poured her plaint.
Then, Daphnis, to the cooling streams were none
That drove the pastured oxen, then no beast
Drank of the river, or would the grass-blade touch.
Nay, the wild rocks and woods then voiced the roar
Of Afric lions mourning for thy death.
Daphnis, 'twas thou bad'st yoke to Bacchus' car
Armenian tigresses, lead on the pomp
Of revellers, and with tender foliage wreathe
The bending spear-wands. As to trees the vine
Is crown of glory, as to vines the grape,
Bulls to the herd, to fruitful fields the corn,
So the one glory of thine own art thou.
When the Fates took thee hence, then Pales' self,
And even Apollo, left the country lone.
Where the plump barley-grain so oft we sowed,
There but wild oats and barren darnel spring;
For tender violet and narcissus bright
Thistle and prickly thorn uprear their heads.
Now, O ye shepherds, strew the ground with leaves,
And o'er the fountains draw a shady veil-
So Daphnis to his memory bids be done-
And rear a tomb, and write thereon
this verse: 'I, Daphnis in the woods, from hence in fame
Am to the stars exalted, guardian once
Of a fair flock, myself more fair than they.'"
In fact, it is made clearer in the preceeding folio about the foul water from this tomb.
In the dark of the night the characters had come upon the broad marble slab with a fresh-water spring at its foot and a shallow brass cup on a chain resting on top. They were unable to see the inscription on the tomb because of the night time darkness. Desire takes a drink, then hands the cup to Cueur who, after drinking from it, carelessly lets the rest of the water run down the marble shaft. Instantly the hitherto clear, starry sky grows overcast with heavy storm-clouds; thunder and lightning, rain and hail come hurtling down on the helpless exposed men, drenching them before they can reach shelter under a trembling aspen tree, they themselves trembling and shivering. The storm ends as suddenly as it began, and the stars shine through the trees once more.
In the folio the men are shown resting, Cueur propped up on his right hand, Desire leaning on his left elbow, talking over the fright they have just had, before they fall asleep. It is not until the next morning that they will find the solution to this mystery.. The next morning they read the tomb inscription saying the water should not be drunk because it is cursed!
Le Livre du Cueur d'Amours Espris - folio 12.
Note our Arcadian tomb, to the top right of the picture.
Elias L. Rivers suggested the phrase "Et In Arcadia Ego" is derived from the line from Daphnis' funeral in Virgil's Fifth Eclogue Daphnis ego in silvis ("Daphnis was I amid the woods"), and that it referred to the dead shepherd within the tomb, rather than Death itself (in Et In Arcadia Ego: Essays on Death in the Pastoral Novel).
Above: Daphnis tomb. From Virgil, Opera (Lyons, 1517).The tomb-inscription, "Daphnis ego in sylvis" ("I Daphnis in the woods"), is from Virgil, Ecl. 5.43. Note here also the stream and three water sources from the mountains - only one leads to the river heading towards the tomb exactly as used by Rene d'Anjou.
'Daphnis was a Sicilian hero, to whom the invention of bucolic poetry is ascribed. He is called a son of Hermes by a nymph (Diod. iv. 84), or merely the beloved of Hermes. (Aelian, V. H. x. 18.) Ovid (Met. iv. 275) calls him an Idaean shepherd; but it does not follow from this, that Ovid connected him with either the Phrygian or the Cretan Ida, since Ida signifies any woody mountain. (Etym. Magn. s.v.) His story runs as follows: The nymph, his mother, exposed him when an infant in a charming valley in a laurel grove, from which he received his name of Daphnis, and for which he is also called the favourite of Apollo. (Serv. ad Virg. Eclog. x. 26.) He was brought up by nymphs or shepherds, and he himself became a shepherd, avoiding the bustling crowds of men, and tending his flocks on mount Aetna winter and summer. A Naiad (her name is different in different writers, Echenais, Xenea, Nomia, or Lyce,--Parthen. Erot. 29; Schol. ad Theocrit. i. 65, vii. 73; Serv. ad Virg. Eclog. viii. 68; Phylarg. ad Virg. Eclog. v. 20) fell in love with him, and made him promise never to form a connexion with any other maiden, adding the threat that he should become blind if he violated his vow. For a time the handsome Daphnis resisted all the numerous temptations to which he was exposed, but at last he forgot himself, having been made intoxicated by a princess. The Naiad accordingly punished him with blindness, or, as others relate, changed him into a stone. Previous to this time he had composed bucolic poetry, and with it delighted Artemis during the chase. According to others, Stesichorus made the fate of Daphnis the theme of his bucolic poetry, which was the earliest of its kind. After having become blind, he invoked his father to help him. The god accordingly raised him up to heaven, and caused a well to gush forth on the spot where this happened. The well bore the name of Daphnis, and at it the Sicilians offered an annual sacrifice. (Serv. ad Virg. Ecl. v. 20.) Phylargyrius, on the same passage, states, that Daphnis tried to console himself in his blindness by songs and playing on the flute, but that he did not live long after; and the Scholiast on Theocritus (viii. 93) relates, that Daphnis, while wandering about in his blindness, fell from a steep rock. Somewhat different accounts are contained in Servius (ad Virg. Eclog. viii. 68) and in various parts of the Idyls of Theocritus'. (http://www.theoi.com/Heros/Daphnis.html).
From the above we see that the 'well gushed forth on the spot' where God (his father, Hermes?) raised Daphnis up to heaven - and presumably this 'well' was the water source we see in the iconographic depictions of the death of Daphnis. It is perhaps that well, that fountain of redeeming waters associated later with Christ.
The motifs that we see later - in relation to Arcadian tombs - first appears with Guercino where he is known to have been the first ever painter to use the enigmatic ‘et in arcadia ego…’. There is some sort of link between the paintings of Guercino which were promulgated by Cosimo II de Medici. It was this Medici who commissioned from Guercino another painting called ‘Apollo Flaying Marsyas’ in 1618. It is evident in this painting (see below) that Guercino’s later painting ‘Et in arcadia ego’ was a study. The theme of Apollo Flaying Marsyas was a classicising metaphor of Christ’s sacrifice at the time of Guercino.
It is entirely possible that the idea of these Arcadian themes perculiar to Rene were to be found rooted in the Medici clan as we know that Lorenzo de Medici (1449 –1492), a relative of
Cosimo had, in his lifetime, actually set up a group called the 'Shepherds of Arcadia'. It included artists such as Piero and Antonio del Pollaiuolo, Andrea del Verrocchio, Leonardo da Vinci, Sandro Botticelli, Domenico Ghirlandaio, and Michelangelo Buonarroti - who were involved in the 15th century Renaissance. Although he did not commission many works himself, he helped
them secure commissions from other patrons. Michelangelo lived with Lorenzo and his family for five years, dining at the family table and attending meetings of the Neo-Platonic Academy.
These connections for Rene would have been important.
From the above we see that the 'well gushed forth on the spot' where God (his father, Hermes?) raised Daphnis up to heaven - and presumably this 'well' was the water source we see in the iconographic depictions of the death of Daphnis. It is perhaps that well, that fountain of redeeming waters associated later with Christ.
The motifs that we see later - in relation to Arcadian tombs - first appears with Guercino where he is known to have been the first ever painter to use the enigmatic ‘et in arcadia ego…’. There is some sort of link between the paintings of Guercino which were promulgated by Cosimo II de Medici. It was this Medici who commissioned from Guercino another painting called ‘Apollo Flaying Marsyas’ in 1618. It is evident in this painting (see below) that Guercino’s later painting ‘Et in arcadia ego’ was a study. The theme of Apollo Flaying Marsyas was a classicising metaphor of Christ’s sacrifice at the time of Guercino.
It is entirely possible that the idea of these Arcadian themes perculiar to Rene were to be found rooted in the Medici clan as we know that Lorenzo de Medici (1449 –1492), a relative of
Cosimo had, in his lifetime, actually set up a group called the 'Shepherds of Arcadia'. It included artists such as Piero and Antonio del Pollaiuolo, Andrea del Verrocchio, Leonardo da Vinci, Sandro Botticelli, Domenico Ghirlandaio, and Michelangelo Buonarroti - who were involved in the 15th century Renaissance. Although he did not commission many works himself, he helped
them secure commissions from other patrons. Michelangelo lived with Lorenzo and his family for five years, dining at the family table and attending meetings of the Neo-Platonic Academy.
These connections for Rene would have been important.
|
|
Above - Guercino’s painting called ‘Apollo Flaying Marsyas’ (1618) See the two shepherds watching the sacrifice on the left? They are identical to the shepherds who later observe the ‘et in arcadia’ tomb.
How did Guercino find the motto 'Et in Arcadia Ego'? Did he have some help along the way? How about from a family member of Rene d'Anjou? Cosimo II de Medici, who commisioned the works from Guercino came from a junior line of the Medici family. This family and their artistic connections go even further. Cosimo II was the son of Christina of Lorraine. Through Charles III of Lorraine Christina was descended from René II of Anjou, who was the Count of Vaudémont from 1470, Duke of Lorraine from 1473, and Duke of Bar from 1483 to 1508. His maternal grandfather was René I of Anjou. Did the motto stem from Rene of Anjou?
In a bizarre twist of concepts Guercino, in his version of the Arcadian Shepherds, may be denoting the tomb of Virgil. Why? Because the skull on the tomb has a fly on it, and rather bizarrely Virgil was associated strongly with flies. In a strangley macabre manner Virgil was attributed with magical powers and it was said that he protected the city of Naples from flies, and inflicted upon her enemies plagues of flies. Gervase of Tilbury (born 1150 A.D) was shown some of his (Virgils) magic spells and said that he knew of two churches that used them to control flies. Virgil is also supposed to have used a magic fly to control and direct flies.
Guercino - using iconography associated with Virgil - painted a picture of a tomb with a phrase upon it that may have been adopted from a poem of Virgils about the death of Daphnis.
King Rene himself is known to have excavated for a tomb. He was carrying on a 'family tradition' because in 1279 Charles II of Anjou, King of Naples was responsible for finding the alleged grave of Mary Magdalene at Saint-Maximin-la-Sainte-Baume . He then (Charles) founded the massive Gothic Basilique Ste. Marie-Madeleine in 1295; the basilica had the blessing of Boniface VIII, who placed it under the new teaching order of Dominicans.
It is famously reported that Rene had a red porphyry cup which he told people was used at the wedding of Cana. This cup also had associations with Mary Magdalene. This is not really unusual to read for Rene. The whole Anjou dynasty had adopted Mary Magdalene as their very extra special saint, probably since Charles of Anjou, a relative of Rene, had found her tomb in the 13th century. She was thought to protect this dynasty because as Counts of Provence they also protected the land that she came to and evangelised.
Ludwig Jansen even wonders why the Anjou dynasty had such a bizarre and obsessive love for the Saint. She herself offered two sources of transmission. The first is via Charles of Anjou and his mother, Beatrice of Provence. Perhaps, Ludwig Jansen speculated, Beatrice traced her family back to the legendary ruler of Provence converted by Mary Magdalene, thus emphasising to her son her family's links to apostolic Christianity.
Does this mean more or less for Jansen that the family had inside information about the legends of the Saint and the ruler of Provence? Later, Rene would claim to have many relics associated with Mary Magdalene. For example, in the cathedral in Angers he gave a font which he believed Mary Magdalene had used to baptise the pagan rulers of Provence. He also donated an 'urn' which he had been assured Christ used at the wedding of Cana to change water into wine, which had been transported to Provence by Mary Magdalene1.
Family and pedigree seem to be something Rene was obsessed with. Rene always seemed to be linking Grail Mythology and the legends of King Arthur to bloodlines. To him – these genealogies played an important role. This importance was related to the fact that in the minds of these people France were a ‘chosen people’ and the land of France was a holy land. French kings claimed descent from Troy and the Trojans and therefore the Romans. The Kings and Queens demonstrated a ‘sacred kingship’ and their descent went back to kings who had also possessed a ‘divine right’ to rule. As well as having the ‘divine right’ to rule the French monarchy adhered to the legends that France contained the ancient tribes of Israel (as does Britain). They claimed descent from Francus of Troy, and that Troy, the great city of the Trojans, according to some Greek historians, was founded by the Arcadians. The French king also claimed descent from the Sicambrians, that is, the Merovingian priest kings. The academic
Bernstock continues saying that the French king simultaneously ‘equated with shepherds, Christ, Moses and David, who were all shepherd kings, classical gods and heroes and also Roman Emporers’'. All this symbolism could arguably be tied up in the theme of the paintings of the Arcadian Shepherds.
This obsession with 'true blood' can be gleaned from a work by Shakespeare. This is from HENRY V ACT I - SCENE II. Before discussing it this is a commentary on this section given by C.Preston Guice. He says:
"Shakespeare even as a playright was considered by some a student of history. A few considered him more enlightened than his historian counterparts and yet many feel that Shakespeare could not have had the opportunity or ability to achieve such knowledge. Although I wish to remain neutral in this "conflict of credit", it is my humble opinion that, between the two, only Christopher Marlowe could have and would have surely been privey to the knowledge penned in the following discourses of "Henry the Fifth". Marlowe was apparently associated with the secret fraternal brotherhoods that relied upon this particular version of history. This, being the organization which Rene D'Anjou was the leader from 1418 till his death in 1481. Rene was also the Duke of Lorraine although the Duke of Lorraine referred to is Rene's Father-in-Law who preceded him. It should also be noted here that Rene's daughter married Henry VI and became deeply involved in the War of the Roses...."
And what is this inside information, in the Shakespeare play, which involved the House of Anjou? It is as follows:
"CANTERBURY: Then hear me, gracious sovereign, and you peers, That owe yourselves, your lives and services To this imperial throne. There is no bar To make against your highness' claim to France But this, which they produce from Pharamond,
'In terram Salicam mulieres ne succedant:'
'No woman shall succeed in Salique land:'
Which Salique land the French unjustly gloze To be the realm of France, and Pharamond The founder of this law and female bar. Yet their own authors faithfully affirm That the land Salique is in Germany, Between the floods of Sala and of Elbe; Where Charles the Great, having subdued the Saxons, There left behind and settled certain French; Who, holding in disdain the German women For some dishonest manners of their life, Establish'd then this law; to wit, no female Should be inheritrix in Salique land: Which Salique, as I said, 'twixt Elbe and Sala, Is at this day in Germany call'd Meisen. Then doth it well appear that Salique law Was not devised for the realm of France: Nor did the French possess the Salique land Until four hundred one and twenty years After defunction of King Pharamond, Idly supposed the founder of this law; Who died within the year of our redemption Four hundred twenty-six; and Charles the Great Subdued the Saxons, and did seat the French Beyond the river Sala, in the year Eight hundred five. Besides, their writers say, King Pepin, which deposed Childeric, Did, as heir general, being descended Of Blithild, which was daughter to King Clothair, Make claim and title to the crown of France. Hugh Capet also, who usurped the crown Of Charles the duke of Lorraine, sole heir male Of the true line and stock of Charles the Great, To find his title with some shows of truth, 'Through, in pure truth, it was corrupt and naught, Convey'd himself as heir to the Lady Lingare, Daughter to Charlemain, who was the son To Lewis the emperor, and Lewis the son Of Charles the Great. Also King Lewis the Tenth, Who was sole heir to the usurper Capet, Could not keep quiet in his conscience, Wearing the crown of France, till satisfied That fair Queen Isabel, his grandmother, Was lineal of the Lady Ermengare, Daughter to Charles the foresaid duke of Lorraine: By the which marriage the line of Charles the Great Was re-united to the crown of France. So that, as clear as is the summer's sun. King Pepin's title and Hugh Capet's claim, King Lewis his satisfaction, all appear To hold in right and title of the female: So do the kings of France unto this day; Howbeit they would hold up this Salique law To bar your highness claiming from the female, And rather choose to hide them in a net Than amply to imbar their crooked titles Usurp'd from you and your progenitors.
KING HENRY V: May I with right and conscience make this claim?
CANTERBURY: The sin upon my head, dread sovereign! For in the book of Numbers is it writ, When the man dies, let the inheritance Descend unto the daughter. Gracious lord, Stand for your own; unwind your bloody flag; Look back into your mighty ancestors: Go, my dread lord, to your great-grandsire's tomb, From whom you claim; invoke his warlike spirit, And your great-uncle's, Edward the Black Prince, Who on the French ground play'd a tragedy, Making defeat on the full power of France, Whiles his most mighty father on a hill Stood smiling to behold his lion's whelp Forage in blood of French nobility. O noble English that could entertain With half their forces the full Pride of France And let another half stand laughing by, All out of work and cold for action! (http://kingrene.guice.org/henryv.html).
This particular 'story' of the early ancestry of the House of Anjou, which promoted that the true line and legitimate line of Charles the Great was Charles of Lorraine, a line that Hugh Capet had usurped reminded me of another link in this family affair, and was linked to Priory of Sion mythology in a bizarre way!
Camille Bartoli (a French author) had written a book about the identity of the ‘Man In The Iron Mask’. I had chanced upon the work of this Bartoli quite by accident. Because there was a reference in the 1982 book ‘Holy Blood & Holy Grail’ about this 'Man in the Iron Mask' i had been researching all the theories about this Iron Mask character. Lincoln et al had suggested that the Iron Mask could have been Nicolas Fouquet. Fouquet's incarceration had occurred after he had received the famous letter from Abbe Louis Fouquet, his brother, in which he discussed his meeting with Nicolas Poussin in Rome. In this letter it was detailed that through Poussin his brother could discover a monumental secret and consequently Fouquet was incarcerated and became the legendary Iron Mask! Bartoli's work was an appraisal of all the theories ever advanced about the identity of the real historical Iron Mask prisoner.
In his book Bartoli discusses his meeting with an elderly and distinguished gentleman at the Hotel Negresco in Nice. The gentleman, known simply as Monsieur G, offers to tell Bartoli ‘the secret’ of the Iron Mask on one condition - that he publish it. Monsieur G told Bartoli that the conspiracy involving the Iron Mask was created by ‘secret’ members of the ‘Order of the Temple’. This, he said, was a ‘clandestine’ organisation which survived the Knights Templar after their demise in 1307. Monsieur G himself claimed to be a member of this ‘secret order’. He
explained:
‘ ….The secret that the Templars of the 17th century were seeking, as were the Templar knights before them, was to impose their ‘grand design’ upon the world, a political and religious system to unify all nations and sects …….’.
Monsieur G then went on to detail the first part of this ‘grand design’ of the secret Templars. It involved the re-instatement of the legitimate French monarchy and this monarchy was identified as those Frankish kings –the Merovingian's – who Monsieur G added ‘were kings by right of birth’. All dynasties which followed after – the Capetian's, the Valois and the Bourbon were said to be illegitimate. It was re-iterated:
‘The crown of France belonged by divine right to the descendants of Charles de Lorraine,
who was the true heir when Capet usurped the throne at the end of the 10th century’.
This information was that which was being promulgated in the Shakepseare play. This Charles of Lorraine was "... the son of Louis IV of France and Gerberga of Saxony and younger brother of King Lothair. He was a sixth generation descendant of Charlemagne. His father was himself son of Charles III and Eadgifu of England, a daughter of King Edward the Elder. Charles III was the undisputed King of France from 898 until 922 and the King of Lotharingia from 911 until 919/23. He was a son of Louis the Stamerer by his second wife, Adelaide of Paris. Louis the Stammerer was the King of Aquitaine and later King of West Francia. He was the eldest son of Charles the Bald and Ermentrude of Orleans. He succeeded his younger brother in Aquitaine in 886 and his father in West Francia in 877 though he was never crowned Emperor. In the French monarchial system, he is considered Louis II."
So Charles of Lorraine could legitimatly trace his line back to Charles the Bald and Charlemagne. Therefore:
"Charles III (10th century) was excluded from the throne of France, and the German Emperor Otto II made him Duke of Lower Lorraine in 977. In 977, he accused Lothair's wife, Emma, daughter of Lothair II of Italy, of infideility with Adalberon, Bishop of Laon. The council of
Sainte-Macre at Fismes (near Reims) exonerated the queen and the bishop, but Charles maintained his claim & was driven from the kingdom, finding refuge at the court of his
cousin, Otto II. Otto promised to crown Charles as soon as Lothair was out of the way and Charles paid him homage, receiving back Lower Lorraine. In August 978, Lothair invaded Germany and captured the imperial capital of Aachen, but failed to capture either Otto or Charles. In October, Otto and Charles in turn invaded France, devastating the land around Rheims, Soissons and Laon. In the latter city, the chief seat of the kings of France, Charles was crowned by Theodoric I, Bishop of Metz. Lothair fled to Paris and was there besieged. But a
relief army of Hugh Capet's forced Otto and Charles to lift the siege on 30 November. Lothair and Capet, the tables turned once more, chased the German king and his liege back to Aachen and retook Laon.
Through his daughter Gerberga of Lower Lorraine, (a countess of Brussels, who married Lambert I, Count of Leuven) and granddaughter Mathilda (Maud) the line of Charles later engendered Eustace I - who was father of Eustace II. It is Eustace II's s second marriage with Ida of Lorraine (daughter of Godfrey III, Duke of Lower Lorraine), which produced the
three sons, Eustace III, the next count of Boulogne, and Godfrey of Bouillon and Baldwin, both later kings of Jerusalem.
As Charles had been a vassal also of Lothair, Charles' acts on behalf of Otto were considered
treason and he was thereafter excluded from the throne. On Lothair's death (986), the magnates elected his son Louis V and on the latter's death (987), Hugh Capet. Thus, the House of Capet came to the throne over the disgraced and ignored Charles".
What is interesting is that Rene d'Anjou and his line can trace back to Louis V of France (a so called 'do nothing king') who after dying in a hunting accident left no legitimate heirs, so his uncle Charles III cited above was advanced as the hereditary successor to the throne. But the clergy, including both Adalberon and Gerbert (who later became Pope Sylvester III), argued eloquently for Hugh Capet, who was not only of royal blood but had proven himself through his
actions and his military might. Capet was elected to the Frankish throne and Adalberon crowned him, all within two months of Louis V's death. Thus the Carolingian dynasty ended and the Capetian began
Monsieur G cited Godefroy de Bouillon as one of these descendants of Charles de Lorraine and he, of course, was first defender of Jerusalem. Also of importance is the fact that Godefroy appears to have renounced his titles of Duke but to have kept all his titles from his mothers
side. On his mothers side Godefroy was alleged to be of Merovingian blood. It was after Godefroy was selected as Advocatus of the Holy Sepulchre (dated at the 2nd of July 1099 – after refusing the royal title of King of Jerusalem he accepted the title of ‘Protector of the Holy Sepulchre’) that the Knights Templar were formed.
Monsieur G went on to say that when Louis XIVth was king he realised that there was a conspiracy against him and that a concerted effort was being made to oust him in favour of the Grand Monarch. He learnt the identity of this ‘Grand Monarch’ through the secret order
who were trying to replace him. It was Henri de Lorraine, descendant of Charlemagne and heir to the Merovingian kings. Basically, Louis then had Henri imprisoned and it was Henri who became the ‘Man in the Iron Mask’.
So it seems that this 'Underground Tradition' for Rene could have been many things. Something pertaining to his bloodline, a bloodline that really was illustrious. This bloodline included members of the early Capetian dynasty, Carolingians, Visigthic nobility and of course Merovingian's. The 'Underground Tradition' also quite clearly meant 'lost and hidden knowledge' with which he engaged such families as the Sforza and Medici to open libraries to house manuscripts and ancient knowledge. These people actively promoted the seeking out of manuscripts - which eventually led to the Renaissance.
But this possible 'underground tradition' seems to have affected the whole Anjou dynasty. They were obsessed with locating the last resting place of Mary Magdalene, and in some cases persisted in their own knowledge of its whereabouts, even in the face of strong challenges from elsewhere. And later, we find Rene doing exactly the same, excavating and looking for tombs. An ancester of his had already discovered Mary Magdalene so who was Rene searching for? Did he find what he was looking for?
Recent research by Oliviero (see elsewhere on this site) has suggested that the enigmatic phrase of 'et in arcadia ego ...' on the tombs painted by Guercino and Poussin may actually mean:
“ I am also in the divine tomb” or “also I am in the divine tomb”.
Oliviero went on to say:
“The translation can even be improved (by) using the past tense for the verb to be, as the sense seems to suggest. The sentence then becomes “Et in Arcadia ego (fui)”: Also I was in the divine tomb. As a matter of fact, the word “fui” (I was) is composed of three letters and can perfectly fit the three dots (if we think of them as markers for lacking letters) Pierre
Plantard talked about. The sentence could, in this way, represent a marker to recognize “those who know the secret”, as a kind of sect or elite group, who had the privilege to go inside the “divine tomb”(whatever it could be) because the clear meaning of the motto is “I also am one of those who entered the divine tomb”.
As we know that Rene devoted his talent to decoration: painting emblems, arms, mottos as well as writing poems, and perhaps creating/writing mottos. Were all his interests and activities correlated in some way? Did he create a new motto ..'et in arcadia ego ...' to let others know he also was 'one of those who entered a divine tomb? if he did indeed find a tomb during one of his archaeological expeditions? It is most intriguing.
Many years later his descendants will be linked to the so called Poussin Tomb in the vicinity of Arques, and Rennes-le-Chateau. The link is the family of the Joyeuses. They owned the land on which the tomb pictured in Poussin's painting of the Shepherds of Arcadia is said to have been situated. Henrietta - Catherine de Joyeuse remarried in 1611 Charles de Lorraine, fourth Duke of Guise. Her first marriage had been to Henri de Bourbon. Their daughter Marie Bourbon, Duchess of Montpensier married Gaston Jean-Baptiste, Duc de Orleans. He was a son of Henry IVth & Marie de Medici. Gaston himself married later Marguerite, a daughter of Charles IVth & their daughter went on to marry Cosimo III de Medici. One can see a pattern of inter-relationship here between the Medici clan and the families whose ancestry goes back to Good King Rene, originator of the Arcadian symbolism later used by Poussin.
It seems this 'underground stream' was symbolic for certain information and family knowledge or perhaps even a discovery (whether literally, or from knowlegde gained). Information which was esoteric and unseen, just like a subterranean river Alpheus in the geographical Arcadia. What Rene did was take the motif of the tomb and a stream in Arcadia and the Virgil poem and mold it to reflect his own interests and his own esoteric knowledge. It is to his ancestry, his activities and interests that i think this esoteric knowledge lies. And this is reflected in his excavations, his bloodline and his fusing of all of this with the Holy Grail and chivalrous knights.
All this kind of mish-mash of information would make the Plantard 'Priory of Sion' smile. For these themes are most certainly advanced via the Priory 'propaganda'! And Rene of Anjou is even asserted to have been a 'helmsman' of this fabled Secret Society - linked by them to the affair at Rennes-le-Chateau. The question is this - is it all based on some as yet unseen 'truth' or is it just mystification for the pleasure of mystifying from those master pranksters?
How did Guercino find the motto 'Et in Arcadia Ego'? Did he have some help along the way? How about from a family member of Rene d'Anjou? Cosimo II de Medici, who commisioned the works from Guercino came from a junior line of the Medici family. This family and their artistic connections go even further. Cosimo II was the son of Christina of Lorraine. Through Charles III of Lorraine Christina was descended from René II of Anjou, who was the Count of Vaudémont from 1470, Duke of Lorraine from 1473, and Duke of Bar from 1483 to 1508. His maternal grandfather was René I of Anjou. Did the motto stem from Rene of Anjou?
In a bizarre twist of concepts Guercino, in his version of the Arcadian Shepherds, may be denoting the tomb of Virgil. Why? Because the skull on the tomb has a fly on it, and rather bizarrely Virgil was associated strongly with flies. In a strangley macabre manner Virgil was attributed with magical powers and it was said that he protected the city of Naples from flies, and inflicted upon her enemies plagues of flies. Gervase of Tilbury (born 1150 A.D) was shown some of his (Virgils) magic spells and said that he knew of two churches that used them to control flies. Virgil is also supposed to have used a magic fly to control and direct flies.
Guercino - using iconography associated with Virgil - painted a picture of a tomb with a phrase upon it that may have been adopted from a poem of Virgils about the death of Daphnis.
King Rene himself is known to have excavated for a tomb. He was carrying on a 'family tradition' because in 1279 Charles II of Anjou, King of Naples was responsible for finding the alleged grave of Mary Magdalene at Saint-Maximin-la-Sainte-Baume . He then (Charles) founded the massive Gothic Basilique Ste. Marie-Madeleine in 1295; the basilica had the blessing of Boniface VIII, who placed it under the new teaching order of Dominicans.
It is famously reported that Rene had a red porphyry cup which he told people was used at the wedding of Cana. This cup also had associations with Mary Magdalene. This is not really unusual to read for Rene. The whole Anjou dynasty had adopted Mary Magdalene as their very extra special saint, probably since Charles of Anjou, a relative of Rene, had found her tomb in the 13th century. She was thought to protect this dynasty because as Counts of Provence they also protected the land that she came to and evangelised.
Ludwig Jansen even wonders why the Anjou dynasty had such a bizarre and obsessive love for the Saint. She herself offered two sources of transmission. The first is via Charles of Anjou and his mother, Beatrice of Provence. Perhaps, Ludwig Jansen speculated, Beatrice traced her family back to the legendary ruler of Provence converted by Mary Magdalene, thus emphasising to her son her family's links to apostolic Christianity.
Does this mean more or less for Jansen that the family had inside information about the legends of the Saint and the ruler of Provence? Later, Rene would claim to have many relics associated with Mary Magdalene. For example, in the cathedral in Angers he gave a font which he believed Mary Magdalene had used to baptise the pagan rulers of Provence. He also donated an 'urn' which he had been assured Christ used at the wedding of Cana to change water into wine, which had been transported to Provence by Mary Magdalene1.
Family and pedigree seem to be something Rene was obsessed with. Rene always seemed to be linking Grail Mythology and the legends of King Arthur to bloodlines. To him – these genealogies played an important role. This importance was related to the fact that in the minds of these people France were a ‘chosen people’ and the land of France was a holy land. French kings claimed descent from Troy and the Trojans and therefore the Romans. The Kings and Queens demonstrated a ‘sacred kingship’ and their descent went back to kings who had also possessed a ‘divine right’ to rule. As well as having the ‘divine right’ to rule the French monarchy adhered to the legends that France contained the ancient tribes of Israel (as does Britain). They claimed descent from Francus of Troy, and that Troy, the great city of the Trojans, according to some Greek historians, was founded by the Arcadians. The French king also claimed descent from the Sicambrians, that is, the Merovingian priest kings. The academic
Bernstock continues saying that the French king simultaneously ‘equated with shepherds, Christ, Moses and David, who were all shepherd kings, classical gods and heroes and also Roman Emporers’'. All this symbolism could arguably be tied up in the theme of the paintings of the Arcadian Shepherds.
This obsession with 'true blood' can be gleaned from a work by Shakespeare. This is from HENRY V ACT I - SCENE II. Before discussing it this is a commentary on this section given by C.Preston Guice. He says:
"Shakespeare even as a playright was considered by some a student of history. A few considered him more enlightened than his historian counterparts and yet many feel that Shakespeare could not have had the opportunity or ability to achieve such knowledge. Although I wish to remain neutral in this "conflict of credit", it is my humble opinion that, between the two, only Christopher Marlowe could have and would have surely been privey to the knowledge penned in the following discourses of "Henry the Fifth". Marlowe was apparently associated with the secret fraternal brotherhoods that relied upon this particular version of history. This, being the organization which Rene D'Anjou was the leader from 1418 till his death in 1481. Rene was also the Duke of Lorraine although the Duke of Lorraine referred to is Rene's Father-in-Law who preceded him. It should also be noted here that Rene's daughter married Henry VI and became deeply involved in the War of the Roses...."
And what is this inside information, in the Shakespeare play, which involved the House of Anjou? It is as follows:
"CANTERBURY: Then hear me, gracious sovereign, and you peers, That owe yourselves, your lives and services To this imperial throne. There is no bar To make against your highness' claim to France But this, which they produce from Pharamond,
'In terram Salicam mulieres ne succedant:'
'No woman shall succeed in Salique land:'
Which Salique land the French unjustly gloze To be the realm of France, and Pharamond The founder of this law and female bar. Yet their own authors faithfully affirm That the land Salique is in Germany, Between the floods of Sala and of Elbe; Where Charles the Great, having subdued the Saxons, There left behind and settled certain French; Who, holding in disdain the German women For some dishonest manners of their life, Establish'd then this law; to wit, no female Should be inheritrix in Salique land: Which Salique, as I said, 'twixt Elbe and Sala, Is at this day in Germany call'd Meisen. Then doth it well appear that Salique law Was not devised for the realm of France: Nor did the French possess the Salique land Until four hundred one and twenty years After defunction of King Pharamond, Idly supposed the founder of this law; Who died within the year of our redemption Four hundred twenty-six; and Charles the Great Subdued the Saxons, and did seat the French Beyond the river Sala, in the year Eight hundred five. Besides, their writers say, King Pepin, which deposed Childeric, Did, as heir general, being descended Of Blithild, which was daughter to King Clothair, Make claim and title to the crown of France. Hugh Capet also, who usurped the crown Of Charles the duke of Lorraine, sole heir male Of the true line and stock of Charles the Great, To find his title with some shows of truth, 'Through, in pure truth, it was corrupt and naught, Convey'd himself as heir to the Lady Lingare, Daughter to Charlemain, who was the son To Lewis the emperor, and Lewis the son Of Charles the Great. Also King Lewis the Tenth, Who was sole heir to the usurper Capet, Could not keep quiet in his conscience, Wearing the crown of France, till satisfied That fair Queen Isabel, his grandmother, Was lineal of the Lady Ermengare, Daughter to Charles the foresaid duke of Lorraine: By the which marriage the line of Charles the Great Was re-united to the crown of France. So that, as clear as is the summer's sun. King Pepin's title and Hugh Capet's claim, King Lewis his satisfaction, all appear To hold in right and title of the female: So do the kings of France unto this day; Howbeit they would hold up this Salique law To bar your highness claiming from the female, And rather choose to hide them in a net Than amply to imbar their crooked titles Usurp'd from you and your progenitors.
KING HENRY V: May I with right and conscience make this claim?
CANTERBURY: The sin upon my head, dread sovereign! For in the book of Numbers is it writ, When the man dies, let the inheritance Descend unto the daughter. Gracious lord, Stand for your own; unwind your bloody flag; Look back into your mighty ancestors: Go, my dread lord, to your great-grandsire's tomb, From whom you claim; invoke his warlike spirit, And your great-uncle's, Edward the Black Prince, Who on the French ground play'd a tragedy, Making defeat on the full power of France, Whiles his most mighty father on a hill Stood smiling to behold his lion's whelp Forage in blood of French nobility. O noble English that could entertain With half their forces the full Pride of France And let another half stand laughing by, All out of work and cold for action! (http://kingrene.guice.org/henryv.html).
This particular 'story' of the early ancestry of the House of Anjou, which promoted that the true line and legitimate line of Charles the Great was Charles of Lorraine, a line that Hugh Capet had usurped reminded me of another link in this family affair, and was linked to Priory of Sion mythology in a bizarre way!
Camille Bartoli (a French author) had written a book about the identity of the ‘Man In The Iron Mask’. I had chanced upon the work of this Bartoli quite by accident. Because there was a reference in the 1982 book ‘Holy Blood & Holy Grail’ about this 'Man in the Iron Mask' i had been researching all the theories about this Iron Mask character. Lincoln et al had suggested that the Iron Mask could have been Nicolas Fouquet. Fouquet's incarceration had occurred after he had received the famous letter from Abbe Louis Fouquet, his brother, in which he discussed his meeting with Nicolas Poussin in Rome. In this letter it was detailed that through Poussin his brother could discover a monumental secret and consequently Fouquet was incarcerated and became the legendary Iron Mask! Bartoli's work was an appraisal of all the theories ever advanced about the identity of the real historical Iron Mask prisoner.
In his book Bartoli discusses his meeting with an elderly and distinguished gentleman at the Hotel Negresco in Nice. The gentleman, known simply as Monsieur G, offers to tell Bartoli ‘the secret’ of the Iron Mask on one condition - that he publish it. Monsieur G told Bartoli that the conspiracy involving the Iron Mask was created by ‘secret’ members of the ‘Order of the Temple’. This, he said, was a ‘clandestine’ organisation which survived the Knights Templar after their demise in 1307. Monsieur G himself claimed to be a member of this ‘secret order’. He
explained:
‘ ….The secret that the Templars of the 17th century were seeking, as were the Templar knights before them, was to impose their ‘grand design’ upon the world, a political and religious system to unify all nations and sects …….’.
Monsieur G then went on to detail the first part of this ‘grand design’ of the secret Templars. It involved the re-instatement of the legitimate French monarchy and this monarchy was identified as those Frankish kings –the Merovingian's – who Monsieur G added ‘were kings by right of birth’. All dynasties which followed after – the Capetian's, the Valois and the Bourbon were said to be illegitimate. It was re-iterated:
‘The crown of France belonged by divine right to the descendants of Charles de Lorraine,
who was the true heir when Capet usurped the throne at the end of the 10th century’.
This information was that which was being promulgated in the Shakepseare play. This Charles of Lorraine was "... the son of Louis IV of France and Gerberga of Saxony and younger brother of King Lothair. He was a sixth generation descendant of Charlemagne. His father was himself son of Charles III and Eadgifu of England, a daughter of King Edward the Elder. Charles III was the undisputed King of France from 898 until 922 and the King of Lotharingia from 911 until 919/23. He was a son of Louis the Stamerer by his second wife, Adelaide of Paris. Louis the Stammerer was the King of Aquitaine and later King of West Francia. He was the eldest son of Charles the Bald and Ermentrude of Orleans. He succeeded his younger brother in Aquitaine in 886 and his father in West Francia in 877 though he was never crowned Emperor. In the French monarchial system, he is considered Louis II."
So Charles of Lorraine could legitimatly trace his line back to Charles the Bald and Charlemagne. Therefore:
"Charles III (10th century) was excluded from the throne of France, and the German Emperor Otto II made him Duke of Lower Lorraine in 977. In 977, he accused Lothair's wife, Emma, daughter of Lothair II of Italy, of infideility with Adalberon, Bishop of Laon. The council of
Sainte-Macre at Fismes (near Reims) exonerated the queen and the bishop, but Charles maintained his claim & was driven from the kingdom, finding refuge at the court of his
cousin, Otto II. Otto promised to crown Charles as soon as Lothair was out of the way and Charles paid him homage, receiving back Lower Lorraine. In August 978, Lothair invaded Germany and captured the imperial capital of Aachen, but failed to capture either Otto or Charles. In October, Otto and Charles in turn invaded France, devastating the land around Rheims, Soissons and Laon. In the latter city, the chief seat of the kings of France, Charles was crowned by Theodoric I, Bishop of Metz. Lothair fled to Paris and was there besieged. But a
relief army of Hugh Capet's forced Otto and Charles to lift the siege on 30 November. Lothair and Capet, the tables turned once more, chased the German king and his liege back to Aachen and retook Laon.
Through his daughter Gerberga of Lower Lorraine, (a countess of Brussels, who married Lambert I, Count of Leuven) and granddaughter Mathilda (Maud) the line of Charles later engendered Eustace I - who was father of Eustace II. It is Eustace II's s second marriage with Ida of Lorraine (daughter of Godfrey III, Duke of Lower Lorraine), which produced the
three sons, Eustace III, the next count of Boulogne, and Godfrey of Bouillon and Baldwin, both later kings of Jerusalem.
As Charles had been a vassal also of Lothair, Charles' acts on behalf of Otto were considered
treason and he was thereafter excluded from the throne. On Lothair's death (986), the magnates elected his son Louis V and on the latter's death (987), Hugh Capet. Thus, the House of Capet came to the throne over the disgraced and ignored Charles".
What is interesting is that Rene d'Anjou and his line can trace back to Louis V of France (a so called 'do nothing king') who after dying in a hunting accident left no legitimate heirs, so his uncle Charles III cited above was advanced as the hereditary successor to the throne. But the clergy, including both Adalberon and Gerbert (who later became Pope Sylvester III), argued eloquently for Hugh Capet, who was not only of royal blood but had proven himself through his
actions and his military might. Capet was elected to the Frankish throne and Adalberon crowned him, all within two months of Louis V's death. Thus the Carolingian dynasty ended and the Capetian began
Monsieur G cited Godefroy de Bouillon as one of these descendants of Charles de Lorraine and he, of course, was first defender of Jerusalem. Also of importance is the fact that Godefroy appears to have renounced his titles of Duke but to have kept all his titles from his mothers
side. On his mothers side Godefroy was alleged to be of Merovingian blood. It was after Godefroy was selected as Advocatus of the Holy Sepulchre (dated at the 2nd of July 1099 – after refusing the royal title of King of Jerusalem he accepted the title of ‘Protector of the Holy Sepulchre’) that the Knights Templar were formed.
Monsieur G went on to say that when Louis XIVth was king he realised that there was a conspiracy against him and that a concerted effort was being made to oust him in favour of the Grand Monarch. He learnt the identity of this ‘Grand Monarch’ through the secret order
who were trying to replace him. It was Henri de Lorraine, descendant of Charlemagne and heir to the Merovingian kings. Basically, Louis then had Henri imprisoned and it was Henri who became the ‘Man in the Iron Mask’.
So it seems that this 'Underground Tradition' for Rene could have been many things. Something pertaining to his bloodline, a bloodline that really was illustrious. This bloodline included members of the early Capetian dynasty, Carolingians, Visigthic nobility and of course Merovingian's. The 'Underground Tradition' also quite clearly meant 'lost and hidden knowledge' with which he engaged such families as the Sforza and Medici to open libraries to house manuscripts and ancient knowledge. These people actively promoted the seeking out of manuscripts - which eventually led to the Renaissance.
But this possible 'underground tradition' seems to have affected the whole Anjou dynasty. They were obsessed with locating the last resting place of Mary Magdalene, and in some cases persisted in their own knowledge of its whereabouts, even in the face of strong challenges from elsewhere. And later, we find Rene doing exactly the same, excavating and looking for tombs. An ancester of his had already discovered Mary Magdalene so who was Rene searching for? Did he find what he was looking for?
Recent research by Oliviero (see elsewhere on this site) has suggested that the enigmatic phrase of 'et in arcadia ego ...' on the tombs painted by Guercino and Poussin may actually mean:
“ I am also in the divine tomb” or “also I am in the divine tomb”.
Oliviero went on to say:
“The translation can even be improved (by) using the past tense for the verb to be, as the sense seems to suggest. The sentence then becomes “Et in Arcadia ego (fui)”: Also I was in the divine tomb. As a matter of fact, the word “fui” (I was) is composed of three letters and can perfectly fit the three dots (if we think of them as markers for lacking letters) Pierre
Plantard talked about. The sentence could, in this way, represent a marker to recognize “those who know the secret”, as a kind of sect or elite group, who had the privilege to go inside the “divine tomb”(whatever it could be) because the clear meaning of the motto is “I also am one of those who entered the divine tomb”.
As we know that Rene devoted his talent to decoration: painting emblems, arms, mottos as well as writing poems, and perhaps creating/writing mottos. Were all his interests and activities correlated in some way? Did he create a new motto ..'et in arcadia ego ...' to let others know he also was 'one of those who entered a divine tomb? if he did indeed find a tomb during one of his archaeological expeditions? It is most intriguing.
Many years later his descendants will be linked to the so called Poussin Tomb in the vicinity of Arques, and Rennes-le-Chateau. The link is the family of the Joyeuses. They owned the land on which the tomb pictured in Poussin's painting of the Shepherds of Arcadia is said to have been situated. Henrietta - Catherine de Joyeuse remarried in 1611 Charles de Lorraine, fourth Duke of Guise. Her first marriage had been to Henri de Bourbon. Their daughter Marie Bourbon, Duchess of Montpensier married Gaston Jean-Baptiste, Duc de Orleans. He was a son of Henry IVth & Marie de Medici. Gaston himself married later Marguerite, a daughter of Charles IVth & their daughter went on to marry Cosimo III de Medici. One can see a pattern of inter-relationship here between the Medici clan and the families whose ancestry goes back to Good King Rene, originator of the Arcadian symbolism later used by Poussin.
It seems this 'underground stream' was symbolic for certain information and family knowledge or perhaps even a discovery (whether literally, or from knowlegde gained). Information which was esoteric and unseen, just like a subterranean river Alpheus in the geographical Arcadia. What Rene did was take the motif of the tomb and a stream in Arcadia and the Virgil poem and mold it to reflect his own interests and his own esoteric knowledge. It is to his ancestry, his activities and interests that i think this esoteric knowledge lies. And this is reflected in his excavations, his bloodline and his fusing of all of this with the Holy Grail and chivalrous knights.
All this kind of mish-mash of information would make the Plantard 'Priory of Sion' smile. For these themes are most certainly advanced via the Priory 'propaganda'! And Rene of Anjou is even asserted to have been a 'helmsman' of this fabled Secret Society - linked by them to the affair at Rennes-le-Chateau. The question is this - is it all based on some as yet unseen 'truth' or is it just mystification for the pleasure of mystifying from those master pranksters?
Read more about Rene here:
http://archive.org/stream/kingrendanjouh00stal#page/n9/mode/2up
http://archive.org/stream/kingrendanjouh00stal#page/n9/mode/2up
Notes:
1) It is also reported that he [Rene] had rock crystal objects of which one was a wine 'glass' associated with Mary Magdalene (as reported below);
1) It is also reported that he [Rene] had rock crystal objects of which one was a wine 'glass' associated with Mary Magdalene (as reported below);
