Here are some copies of issues of the Journal by the Société des arts et des sciences de Carcassonne. You can access them HERE
Report by Elie Tisseyre of a visit to Rennes-le-Chateau with the Society for Scientific Study of the Aude
It is very often that accidentally i find a snippet of information that slots into place. I may even be doing research unrelated to the 'snippet' i find. In an article i wrote about Cherisey and his utilisation of the Codex Bezae i wrote;
"In hindsight i now see that it isnt really the text that is important ... it is what is going on in the rest of the Small Parchment which is significant. The encoder had wanted to draw attention to a 'key' which arguably has nothing to do with the 'concealed' message. This same key is referred to in the Larger Parchment. So did the encoder start with a blank page - put in the information that would be required to find this 'key' and then copy out the section of the Codex Bezae over the top? It must seem a possibility".
If i read correctly Cherisey later admitted as much. Henry Lincoln was grilling Cherisey for answers - and published the following quote in his book 'Key to the sacred pattern'
"The day is ending, but it is fine. De Cherisey expresses a desire to take a stroll and a lengthy preambulation ends on a bench in the Tuileries Gardens. He is still regaling me with well told - and often very funny - anecdotes. But I have more on my mind than entertainment. We are getting on well and the atmosphere is friendly. At last, with time passing and nothing to lose, I decide to put my request baldly.
'Can I take another look at the parchment photographs?'
With only minimal hesitation, he opens his briefcase and hands them to me.
'Why add the marks?' I ask.
'To amuse the laity' he replied
'But why?' I insist.
He shrugs 'I'm an entertainer.'
It is clear that I am to get no straight answers. But - perhaps simply because it was to hand - he adds another fragment. Picking a few sheets from his case, he says: 'I'm writing an explanation of the codes. I'll send you a copy. You'll be amused' But I am never to see it. Nor am I ever to get any closer to the 'parchment originals'. Sadly Philippe de Cherisey died suddenly in July 1985".
Here Cherisey is not talking about the paragraph he copied out from his source of the 'Secundo Primo' verse, but also admitting to adding the 'marks'. As these marks are important it is clear that they are not just to 'amuse the laity'. The question is though, and still not answered: How was Cherisey in posession of such arcane knowledge?
Read more HERE & HERE
On 18/09/2009 i posted the following to a RLC Forum:
" ... while flicking through some old RO's (to be exact RO 31 (2001) )....i came across an interview by Chaumeil with Pierre Plantard dated 13 Jan 1972....(translated by Guy Patton) ... i thought this last section referred to by Plantard was interesting:
"A number of revues are published each year which touch on problems relating to our house ....and not all are to be deposited in the Bibliotheue Nationale ....9 times out of 10, we are not even informed of their publication. There was for example in 1973 LES DESSOUS D'UNE AMBITION POLITIQUE by Mathieu Paoli, 'LA RACE FABULEUSE' by Gerard de Sede, and your revue CHARIVARI.
Certain pamphlets are false, such as that of Joseph Courtaly in 1964, which claimed to republish the author Stublein in LES PIERRES GRAVEES DU LANGUEDOC. Certainly one of the tombstones, reproduced on page 60 (Charivari) is authentic (Reddis-Regis): everyone knows that it had been engraved about 1686 on the order of Henry d'Hautpoul. But the one cited on page II of your revue (ci-git Dame Negri d'Ablis) is false: it was remade in 1905 to serve the needs of Sauniere's cause and published at his request in ....1906 for the first time! All that is very far from 1791 and the Abbe Bigou"
There are many points here that warrant further discussion. Furthermore the words of Plantard here support a comment made by Chaumeil that i think i read in an article on a French website (possibly by IBJ) where Chaumeil said: “I will tell you something… The Tisseyre document is an invention. Or, more exactly, Tisseyre invented a statement saying the expedition to RLC was carried out in 1905 and its findings published in the Bulletin of SESA. Thanks to this article, it [at that time] accredits the presence of the stone in the cemetery of Rennes-le-Chateau and covers… a traffic of relics and archaeological artifacts which was set up by Bérenger Saunière’.
A traffic in relics and archaeological artifacts which was 'set up by Sauniere'? Where was he getting these relics? Is this how he obtained his money? Did he have an inexhaustible supply of relics & artifacts that he kept going back to? And how an earth would the presence of 'the stone in the cemetery' cover a traffic in relics?
I do not believe for one minute that the nocturnal diggings in the cemetery that Sauniere did are where he got these supposed 'relics'. Because if this were true then it begs the question - what was buried in the cemetery at Rennes that its relics could be sold on the antiquities black market for financial gain? No, if he had a continual supply of relics/artifacts he must have been dipping into a vault or treasury of some sort. We may then ask who was buying these relics?
I also highlight two of the comments by Plantard:
'everyone knows that it had been engraved [the Reddis Regis tomb slab] about 1686 on the order of Henry d'Hautpoul'.
"But the one cited on page II of your revue (ci-git Dame Negri d'Ablis) is false: it was remade in 1905 to serve the needs of Sauniere's cause and published at his request in ....1906 for the first time! All that is very far from 1791 and the Abbe Bigou" [My bold highlight].
This means that the remade Marie de Negre tombstone was a fake and this is why no-one has ever seen it. The only tombstone said by Plantard to lie in the cemetery at Rennes was the Reddis/Regis one and therefore it was THAT tombstone that Sauniere obliterated (although some of the villagers could recall this tombstone had some strange lettering's on it, perhaps Greek?). The CI GIT tombstone [despite the stories associated with an 'original'] for Plantard was nothing but a concoction of Sauniere and nothing to do with Bigou despite some [like Cherisey] suggesting that it did ...
These comments suggest that the tombstone of Bigou is indeed the Reddis Regis stone. I am reminded of the famous Sennier letter - passed off as a hoax - which talks of the family of Bigou linked very much with a tomb and a tomb marker later confused with the CI GIT stone.
This led to the following investigation HERE:
The Circles of Gomer, or an Essay towards an Investigation and Introduction of the English, as an Universal Language
It is reported on the blog (HERE) that "Octonovo tells me that [a] passage noted in the book "History of the place of legend, the last work of Umberto Eco" says;
"Generally, in the stories of antiquity, whatever the location of Hyperborea, it was never designated as the place of origin of a chosen race, but with flowering nationalist assumptions about the origins of language, the great north loomed increasingly as the homeland of the language and the original race. In "The circle of Gomer," Rowland Jones (1769) argued that the primary language was Celtic, and that "no language is also closer to the first universal language than English (...) [with its] dialects and wisdom the Celtic circles derived [them] from Trismegistus, Hermes, Mercury or Gomer'.
This Rowland Jones was a well known linguist. At Wikipedia its reported that: "Rowland Jones (1722–1774) was a Welsh lawyer and philologist of radical linguistic views. He was the second son of John Williams of Bachellyn, Llanbedrog, Carnarvonshire, where he was born. He spent some time as clerk in the office of his father, who was a solicitor, but he then obtained a similar situation in London. He married a young Welsh heiress, and was enrolled as a member of the Inner Temple 26 October 1751. He is usually described as of Broom Hall, near Pwllheli, Carnarvonshire. He died in Hamilton Street, Hanover Square, London, early in 1774, aged 52. He left three children, two daughters, Elizabeth and Ann, and a son, Rowland".
It seems he was very interested in the origins of language, publishing several books:
You can access this book below:
Click to set custom HTML
You can access this book below:
Perhaps delving into the history of the time and reading the thoughts of others may help to elucidate what Boudet was trying to achieve?
1] I was very interested to read that these general ideas were not original to Jones. His book on the universal language and his musings upon hieroglyphics in the 1770's followed the literary work of Francis Bacon and his associates - who promulgated similar theories well before Jones. I have briefly touched on these themes HERE and HERE. Also, in respect of sourcing where Boudet may have picked his ideas up about Gomer and his
Welcome to the blog of Rhedesium
My name is Sandy Hamblett, inspired and passionate researcher of the mysteries at Rennes-les-Bains.