THE REDDIS-REGIS STONE
[from the cemetery at Les Pontils?]
Introduction
Paul Smith has this to say about the 'Reddis Cellis' stone:
"Most romantics still seriously believe that the ‘Et In Arcadia Ego’ tombstone [also known as the Reddis Cellis stone] actually existed, despite the overwhelming evidence for it being another forgery concocted by Pierre Plantard and Philippe de Chérisey - existing exclusively in the form of a diagram - and everything relating to it initially originating from their works and environment." [http://priory-of-sion.com/pos/stublein.html].
And Smith is absolutely right. No-one that i know has seen this Reddis Regis/Et in Arcadia Ego stone. Out of the two stones which supposedly covered the burial of Marie de Negre - I felt that this Reddis stone was the more 'reliable'. Why? Because books published about Rennes-le-Chateau had reported that reconstructions of the stone had been made from the memories of local villagers who had witnessed it. This meant that however faded the villagers' memories may have become at least it had been 'seen'! But who exactly were the 'people' who had made the reconstructions? How reliable were they? Did they have any agenda or bias? And what of the villagers? How reliable were they?
Contrary to what Smith says though, some elements of this Reddis 'stone' do appear to have come from a quite different source. This source is the archives of the Aniort family [discussed below] and which appear to have had an eventual bearing on the researches of Noel Corbu. Was this independent strand about a tombstone marked with Reddis/Cellis relayed by Corbu to Plantard when they met and to which Plantard and Cherisey later added more disinformation to its 'pedigree'? Where did Corbu get his information?
Smith goes on to say:
"The 1977 Priory of Sion document Le Cercle d’Ulysse by ‘Jean Delaude’ introduced the myth that the tombstone of Marie de Négi d’Ables was "mentioned in an 18th century work by abbé Delmas, [which] had on its north face a vertical stone which bore this motto: "ET IN ARCADIA EGO", and in 1789 it was transported [from Les Pontils] to the cemetery at Rennes-le-Château". ‘Jean Delaude’ continued: "In the Bishop’s archives there exists a document in the priest’s [Antoine Bigou’s] handwriting, bearing on the transfer of this stone by Guillaume Tiffou from Serres to Rennes-le-Château in November 1789. The engraving represented in his book by Gérard de Sède via Chésa, has been tampered with. From 1789 to 1895, this stone was found on the grave of the Marquise of Blanchefort, in the cemetery of Rennes-le-Château, near the bell tower. This is the one which was defaced by the parish priest, Saunière in January 1895".
The first thing that strikes us in relation to Jean DeLaude's statements is that, according to him, the Reddis tombstone was not originally on the grave of Marie de Negre, for she died, as we know, 17th January 1781. If the stone originally came from the cemetery at Les Pontils then why was it deemed necessary to remove it and put it over the grave of Marie? Was it translated to Serres first? Did the stone have any significance being originally at Les Pontils? And what has the early work of Abbe Delmas anything to do with Marie de Negre?
The figures identified with the stone by Plantard had some links to Marie de Negre and to her and her family in chronological time and events. For example in the statement by DeLaude regarding Antoine Delmas we find that he [Delmas] was born October 9 1644 and his death occurred in 1731. He was ordained priest by that very mysterious bishop of Alet, Nicolas Pavillon himself. We will see below that Pavillon is linked in quite important ways to the origin of the Rennes mystery.
Knowing the extreme rigor of Pavillon in his choice of clergy, one can only assume that Antoine Delmas was - throughout his life - an exemplary and orthodox priest. He was appointed to Baings de Montferrand in November 1672, by Pavillon. The Delmas Report - about Rennes-les-Bains - which Delmas published in 1709 - showed that he had read William Catel (1560-1626) and his "Memoirs of the history of the Languedoc" [published in 1633]. Catel, well before the arrival of Nicolas Pavillon to Alet, noted the remains preserved in the church of Rennes-les-Bains. This proves the remarkable interest already expressed in Rennes-les-Bains in the sixteenth and seventeenth century's - with reports of ancient coins found on the territory of the commune. Catel had carefully reported the inscription on a cippus white marble stone which was engraved with the name "Pompeius Quartus." Later Antoine Delmas confirms the presence of this pedestal in his office. This Pompeius stone is still extant today. The mystery of the Pompeius stone takes on an extraordinary importance - not only for Delmas - but also for Plantard and Cherisey in their researches about the so called 'treasure' at Rennes-le-Chateau.
It was not just the local clergy who were interested in the area of Rennes-le-Chateau/Rennes-les-Bains. Outside of the circle of parish priests, Alexandre Du Mege (1780-1862) also reported that Abbe Bertrand Capmartin of Chaupy (1720-1798), an archaeologist born near Toulouse, had recovered more than 400 currencies of gold and silver coins in the region of Rennes! Abbe Bertrand also left some manuscripts on the Celtic civilization and human language - subjects that strongly interested Henri Boudet. Du Mege, who had often stayed in Rennes-les-Bains, spoke of counselors at the Parliament of Toulouse who had stayed at Rennes and found medals and coins. Jean-François de Montegut (1729-1794), from a family of collectors and a scholar himself, had more than 3,000 Roman coins including many from Rennes-les-Bains. He was also the owner of many paintings by masters including Rubens and Teniers which Delmas had personally seen. Delmas even offered a beautiful sepulchral lamp to the President of the Parliament of Toulouse, M. Caulet!
Paul Urban Villecardet, Count of Fleury (1778-1836) had a nice collection of coins and medals, objects that he had put into a small personal museum he created. He asked Mr. Du Mege to help him appraise all of these artifacts. In 1857, his son Henri-Paul Elie was awarded the Silver Medal of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, Inscriptions and Belles-lettres de Toulouse for his discoveries at Rennes-les-Bains - and his preservation of two wheels and various fragments of a bronze chariot found in the territory of the commune.
Finally, we should note also that Alfred Sauniere [brother of Berenger Sauniere] was a member of the Archaeological Committee of Narbonne and that Henri Boudet also knew Henri Rouzaud who was President of the Committee. Mr. Rouzaud made many study trips to Rennes-les-Bains and Boudet offered him several objects discovered on the territory of his parish: Vases, pottery and a beautiful gourd dated to the fifth or sixth century. How did Henri Boudet make such a find? (see HERE). In what context, archaeologically speaking, did Boudet make this find? One does not simply come across a fifth/sixth century gourd lying about the landscape that is so well preserved [see illustration below]. Did he record any information on how he 'found' it?
Paul Smith has this to say about the 'Reddis Cellis' stone:
"Most romantics still seriously believe that the ‘Et In Arcadia Ego’ tombstone [also known as the Reddis Cellis stone] actually existed, despite the overwhelming evidence for it being another forgery concocted by Pierre Plantard and Philippe de Chérisey - existing exclusively in the form of a diagram - and everything relating to it initially originating from their works and environment." [http://priory-of-sion.com/pos/stublein.html].
And Smith is absolutely right. No-one that i know has seen this Reddis Regis/Et in Arcadia Ego stone. Out of the two stones which supposedly covered the burial of Marie de Negre - I felt that this Reddis stone was the more 'reliable'. Why? Because books published about Rennes-le-Chateau had reported that reconstructions of the stone had been made from the memories of local villagers who had witnessed it. This meant that however faded the villagers' memories may have become at least it had been 'seen'! But who exactly were the 'people' who had made the reconstructions? How reliable were they? Did they have any agenda or bias? And what of the villagers? How reliable were they?
Contrary to what Smith says though, some elements of this Reddis 'stone' do appear to have come from a quite different source. This source is the archives of the Aniort family [discussed below] and which appear to have had an eventual bearing on the researches of Noel Corbu. Was this independent strand about a tombstone marked with Reddis/Cellis relayed by Corbu to Plantard when they met and to which Plantard and Cherisey later added more disinformation to its 'pedigree'? Where did Corbu get his information?
Smith goes on to say:
"The 1977 Priory of Sion document Le Cercle d’Ulysse by ‘Jean Delaude’ introduced the myth that the tombstone of Marie de Négi d’Ables was "mentioned in an 18th century work by abbé Delmas, [which] had on its north face a vertical stone which bore this motto: "ET IN ARCADIA EGO", and in 1789 it was transported [from Les Pontils] to the cemetery at Rennes-le-Château". ‘Jean Delaude’ continued: "In the Bishop’s archives there exists a document in the priest’s [Antoine Bigou’s] handwriting, bearing on the transfer of this stone by Guillaume Tiffou from Serres to Rennes-le-Château in November 1789. The engraving represented in his book by Gérard de Sède via Chésa, has been tampered with. From 1789 to 1895, this stone was found on the grave of the Marquise of Blanchefort, in the cemetery of Rennes-le-Château, near the bell tower. This is the one which was defaced by the parish priest, Saunière in January 1895".
The first thing that strikes us in relation to Jean DeLaude's statements is that, according to him, the Reddis tombstone was not originally on the grave of Marie de Negre, for she died, as we know, 17th January 1781. If the stone originally came from the cemetery at Les Pontils then why was it deemed necessary to remove it and put it over the grave of Marie? Was it translated to Serres first? Did the stone have any significance being originally at Les Pontils? And what has the early work of Abbe Delmas anything to do with Marie de Negre?
The figures identified with the stone by Plantard had some links to Marie de Negre and to her and her family in chronological time and events. For example in the statement by DeLaude regarding Antoine Delmas we find that he [Delmas] was born October 9 1644 and his death occurred in 1731. He was ordained priest by that very mysterious bishop of Alet, Nicolas Pavillon himself. We will see below that Pavillon is linked in quite important ways to the origin of the Rennes mystery.
Knowing the extreme rigor of Pavillon in his choice of clergy, one can only assume that Antoine Delmas was - throughout his life - an exemplary and orthodox priest. He was appointed to Baings de Montferrand in November 1672, by Pavillon. The Delmas Report - about Rennes-les-Bains - which Delmas published in 1709 - showed that he had read William Catel (1560-1626) and his "Memoirs of the history of the Languedoc" [published in 1633]. Catel, well before the arrival of Nicolas Pavillon to Alet, noted the remains preserved in the church of Rennes-les-Bains. This proves the remarkable interest already expressed in Rennes-les-Bains in the sixteenth and seventeenth century's - with reports of ancient coins found on the territory of the commune. Catel had carefully reported the inscription on a cippus white marble stone which was engraved with the name "Pompeius Quartus." Later Antoine Delmas confirms the presence of this pedestal in his office. This Pompeius stone is still extant today. The mystery of the Pompeius stone takes on an extraordinary importance - not only for Delmas - but also for Plantard and Cherisey in their researches about the so called 'treasure' at Rennes-le-Chateau.
It was not just the local clergy who were interested in the area of Rennes-le-Chateau/Rennes-les-Bains. Outside of the circle of parish priests, Alexandre Du Mege (1780-1862) also reported that Abbe Bertrand Capmartin of Chaupy (1720-1798), an archaeologist born near Toulouse, had recovered more than 400 currencies of gold and silver coins in the region of Rennes! Abbe Bertrand also left some manuscripts on the Celtic civilization and human language - subjects that strongly interested Henri Boudet. Du Mege, who had often stayed in Rennes-les-Bains, spoke of counselors at the Parliament of Toulouse who had stayed at Rennes and found medals and coins. Jean-François de Montegut (1729-1794), from a family of collectors and a scholar himself, had more than 3,000 Roman coins including many from Rennes-les-Bains. He was also the owner of many paintings by masters including Rubens and Teniers which Delmas had personally seen. Delmas even offered a beautiful sepulchral lamp to the President of the Parliament of Toulouse, M. Caulet!
Paul Urban Villecardet, Count of Fleury (1778-1836) had a nice collection of coins and medals, objects that he had put into a small personal museum he created. He asked Mr. Du Mege to help him appraise all of these artifacts. In 1857, his son Henri-Paul Elie was awarded the Silver Medal of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, Inscriptions and Belles-lettres de Toulouse for his discoveries at Rennes-les-Bains - and his preservation of two wheels and various fragments of a bronze chariot found in the territory of the commune.
Finally, we should note also that Alfred Sauniere [brother of Berenger Sauniere] was a member of the Archaeological Committee of Narbonne and that Henri Boudet also knew Henri Rouzaud who was President of the Committee. Mr. Rouzaud made many study trips to Rennes-les-Bains and Boudet offered him several objects discovered on the territory of his parish: Vases, pottery and a beautiful gourd dated to the fifth or sixth century. How did Henri Boudet make such a find? (see HERE). In what context, archaeologically speaking, did Boudet make this find? One does not simply come across a fifth/sixth century gourd lying about the landscape that is so well preserved [see illustration below]. Did he record any information on how he 'found' it?
This then is the 'background' scenario of the time of the Reddis stone - essentially of relic hunters - in the context of the alleged Reddis/Cellis stone. It suggests priests and others searching the area of Rennes-les-Bains. Delmas writes about the tomb of the Grand Roman. Legends then surface about a spectacular find of a hidden treasure in and around Rennes, linked specifically to Blaise D'Hautpoul and Nicolas Pavillon. Boudet writes a book about a mysterious tomb in the area of Rennes-les-Bains which he associates with the Resurrection. In the same 'era' Marie de Negre dies and a mystery begins around her burial stones. Perhaps importantly or not, she is the last in the line of the family which can trace back to Blaise d'Hautpoul, who is associated with the original 'treasure' stories of Rennes!
What is the underlying link to all these events, if any, and the Reddis-Cellis stone?
The link for Plantard is certainly Henry of Hautpoul! For Plantard it was this Henry who had had the original Reddis-Cellis stone engraved. Henry had been born around 1642 and died around 1695. His father was Blaise de Hautpoul - a very significant person in the Rennes Affair. Not only was Blaise involved in some high level intrigues involving the Fouquets, Nicolas Pavillon and King Louis XIVth - he is also said by Gino Sandri to have been involved in the creation of the second incarnation of the fabled Priory of Sion. Sandri said;
"With regard to Rennes-le-Chateau, the Priory of Sion established its seat there in 1681. The Compagnie du Saint-Sacrement (Company of the Blessed Sacrament), with the involvement of Henri de Lévis, was dissolved in 1665. Some ..... [of the] followers [of the Saint Sacrement] joined the Priory of Sion. With this origin we find involved Jean-Timoléon de Negri d’ Ables assisted by Blaise d’ Hautpoul. ..... the names of the Abbés Andre-Hercules de Fleury and Jean-Pierre Cabanié [should also be mentioned]. New provisions are taken on September 19, 1730 by François d’ Hautpoul and Jean-Paul de Nègre himself - related to the survival of the Compagnie du Saint-Sacrement. If we return to the Priory of Sion - their files indicate deposits of various natures including documents or objects of which some are extremely old & also I think - certain engraved stones. The situation is very complex. During the French revolution between 1789 and 1792 the “clandestine” deposits are bound up in order to put invaluable files and notarial acts in shelter [away] from the vandals. .... With regard to the Priory of Sion, some of these acts were entrusted to Maximilien of Lorraine, archbishop of Cologne. At the beginning of the 19th century, parts remained in the hands of Hapsburgs who, a few decades later, establish contact with the Abbés Boudet and Saunière. Why? It is a question of the exchange of documents. Another deposit is made up at the Chateau de Lys close to Lille. In 1938, Gabriel Trarieux d’ Egmont is invited there by the count of Saint-Hilier, great-uncle of Philippe de Chérisey. In preparation for the war which had been announced, the files, entrusted to Gabriel Trarieux d’ Egmont are moved to Monte Carlo".(http://troyspace2.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/interview-with-gino-sandri-priory-of-sion-general-secretary-sep-2003/).
Mention of Jean-Pierre Cabanie is interesting. He was a priest of the local area and may have known Sauniere. Another Abbé - François-Pierre Cauneille, a close friend of the Abbe Cabanié, had some involvement in the 'affair' & was especially mentioned in the Sennier letter, as one who witnessed on 11 Feb 1781 Bigou's memoir authenticating the discovery of the tomb of Constant I by one Catherine Planel. This is the origin [according to Sennier] of Labouïsse-Rochefort's legend of the devil's treasure [see below]. In 1789 he [Cauneille?] is also said to have arranged for the removal of the Reddis stone from Les Pontils [cemetery?] by Guillaume Tiffou (after Cabanié had told him about the secret's of the stone). Cauneille was later exiled to Spain with Bigou, Mgr Cropte de Chanterac (last Bishop of Alet) and other clergy in 1792. Sandri seems to suggest that 'certain engraved stones' (surely the one we are interested in now?) were most certainly in the hands of the Priory of Sion, this being the second Priory created by Jean-Timoléon de Negri d’ Ables and Blaise d’ Hautpoul. It comes full circle when seen in the light of Plantard's comment that 'everyone knows that it [the Reddis stone] had been engraved about 1686 on the order of Henry d'Hautpoul'. It seems the origin of the Rennes-le-Chateau Affair may start here.
Rather bizarrely, a text from the magazine Vaincre, numbered 3 and published in September 1989 - entitled 'The Legend of the Paris Meridian' again gives a somewhat different pedigree. Among other assertions this text alleges that;
"...the inscription on the dalle between Serres and Arques must go back to the Humanist Circle of Arcadian Shepherds of Lorenzo de Medici and Politian. It can be dated without risk of error between 1490 and 1502 like Arcadia by Jacopo Sannazaro or the work of Lucas Signorelli, The Kingdom of Pan, [see here], disucussed by Fritz Saxl in 1927. The document of 1808 gave the Priory of Sion [after years of research both on site and in Paris and provincial libraries] the solution to the problem that arose at the time of the French Revolution in 1789. In it one reads: Confronted in the year 1780 by certain curious events, i went to Bezu to visit by colleague Cabanie who, like me, had just been appointed to this place. He told me about an engraved stone at Pontils being re-located to the cemetery at Rennes-le-Chateau on the orders of the Marquise. Tiffou was put in charge of the transfer by horseback in the autumn of 1780. My colleague Cabanie, who was an extremely cultivated man, confided in me the secret of this stone which, according to him, went back to the time of the Templars of Rousillon and had been under the protection of Pieere de Voisins".
The 1977 Priory of Sion document Le Cercle d’Ulysse by ‘Jean Delaude’ [cited above] has, however, introduced glaring errors.For example there is the claim that Delmas mentioned a tombstone. He did no such thing. Delmas did though, refer to a supposed tomb-marker which he attributed in some obscure way to the burial of a Great Roman at Rennes-les-Bains, the sister village of Rennes-le-Chateau. In the context of the Sennier letter, which also revolves around a Maraval/Aniort document, this tomb of a Great Roman could very well be that of Constant I - a tomb, as we have seen above, found by a young shepherdess called Catherine Planel whom Labouïsse-Rochefort believed was the source of the Devils treasure legend at Blanchefort. An interesting point is the surname of the 'shepherdess'? It is 'Planel' - a place identified in the Les Pontils area as illustrated in the picture below! One wonders if the shepherdess ever existed?!
I believe also that Paul Saussez has looked for the Bigou document mentioning the transfer of this stone from Les Pontils to Rennes but he did not locate it. Other errors in the DeLaude document are so obvious as to be quite farcical! Are these 'errors' of Plantard and Chérisey because they are trying to make sense of information they have obtained or is it because they are faking information and in the process losing track of other information they have divulged? As their purported 'scam' got bigger and bigger did this lead to confusion in their Priory 'propaganda'?
At least there is one verifiable fact mentioned by Plantard. There did use to be a cemetery at Les Pontils as illustrated below. From here it is an easy process to see how the other elements of the Priory Mythos were added, as the cemetery isnt far from the so called Poussin tomb. This myth surrounds Poussin and a tomb resembling the one depicted in one of his paintings which was alleged to be found in the Les Pontils district!
What is the underlying link to all these events, if any, and the Reddis-Cellis stone?
The link for Plantard is certainly Henry of Hautpoul! For Plantard it was this Henry who had had the original Reddis-Cellis stone engraved. Henry had been born around 1642 and died around 1695. His father was Blaise de Hautpoul - a very significant person in the Rennes Affair. Not only was Blaise involved in some high level intrigues involving the Fouquets, Nicolas Pavillon and King Louis XIVth - he is also said by Gino Sandri to have been involved in the creation of the second incarnation of the fabled Priory of Sion. Sandri said;
"With regard to Rennes-le-Chateau, the Priory of Sion established its seat there in 1681. The Compagnie du Saint-Sacrement (Company of the Blessed Sacrament), with the involvement of Henri de Lévis, was dissolved in 1665. Some ..... [of the] followers [of the Saint Sacrement] joined the Priory of Sion. With this origin we find involved Jean-Timoléon de Negri d’ Ables assisted by Blaise d’ Hautpoul. ..... the names of the Abbés Andre-Hercules de Fleury and Jean-Pierre Cabanié [should also be mentioned]. New provisions are taken on September 19, 1730 by François d’ Hautpoul and Jean-Paul de Nègre himself - related to the survival of the Compagnie du Saint-Sacrement. If we return to the Priory of Sion - their files indicate deposits of various natures including documents or objects of which some are extremely old & also I think - certain engraved stones. The situation is very complex. During the French revolution between 1789 and 1792 the “clandestine” deposits are bound up in order to put invaluable files and notarial acts in shelter [away] from the vandals. .... With regard to the Priory of Sion, some of these acts were entrusted to Maximilien of Lorraine, archbishop of Cologne. At the beginning of the 19th century, parts remained in the hands of Hapsburgs who, a few decades later, establish contact with the Abbés Boudet and Saunière. Why? It is a question of the exchange of documents. Another deposit is made up at the Chateau de Lys close to Lille. In 1938, Gabriel Trarieux d’ Egmont is invited there by the count of Saint-Hilier, great-uncle of Philippe de Chérisey. In preparation for the war which had been announced, the files, entrusted to Gabriel Trarieux d’ Egmont are moved to Monte Carlo".(http://troyspace2.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/interview-with-gino-sandri-priory-of-sion-general-secretary-sep-2003/).
Mention of Jean-Pierre Cabanie is interesting. He was a priest of the local area and may have known Sauniere. Another Abbé - François-Pierre Cauneille, a close friend of the Abbe Cabanié, had some involvement in the 'affair' & was especially mentioned in the Sennier letter, as one who witnessed on 11 Feb 1781 Bigou's memoir authenticating the discovery of the tomb of Constant I by one Catherine Planel. This is the origin [according to Sennier] of Labouïsse-Rochefort's legend of the devil's treasure [see below]. In 1789 he [Cauneille?] is also said to have arranged for the removal of the Reddis stone from Les Pontils [cemetery?] by Guillaume Tiffou (after Cabanié had told him about the secret's of the stone). Cauneille was later exiled to Spain with Bigou, Mgr Cropte de Chanterac (last Bishop of Alet) and other clergy in 1792. Sandri seems to suggest that 'certain engraved stones' (surely the one we are interested in now?) were most certainly in the hands of the Priory of Sion, this being the second Priory created by Jean-Timoléon de Negri d’ Ables and Blaise d’ Hautpoul. It comes full circle when seen in the light of Plantard's comment that 'everyone knows that it [the Reddis stone] had been engraved about 1686 on the order of Henry d'Hautpoul'. It seems the origin of the Rennes-le-Chateau Affair may start here.
Rather bizarrely, a text from the magazine Vaincre, numbered 3 and published in September 1989 - entitled 'The Legend of the Paris Meridian' again gives a somewhat different pedigree. Among other assertions this text alleges that;
"...the inscription on the dalle between Serres and Arques must go back to the Humanist Circle of Arcadian Shepherds of Lorenzo de Medici and Politian. It can be dated without risk of error between 1490 and 1502 like Arcadia by Jacopo Sannazaro or the work of Lucas Signorelli, The Kingdom of Pan, [see here], disucussed by Fritz Saxl in 1927. The document of 1808 gave the Priory of Sion [after years of research both on site and in Paris and provincial libraries] the solution to the problem that arose at the time of the French Revolution in 1789. In it one reads: Confronted in the year 1780 by certain curious events, i went to Bezu to visit by colleague Cabanie who, like me, had just been appointed to this place. He told me about an engraved stone at Pontils being re-located to the cemetery at Rennes-le-Chateau on the orders of the Marquise. Tiffou was put in charge of the transfer by horseback in the autumn of 1780. My colleague Cabanie, who was an extremely cultivated man, confided in me the secret of this stone which, according to him, went back to the time of the Templars of Rousillon and had been under the protection of Pieere de Voisins".
The 1977 Priory of Sion document Le Cercle d’Ulysse by ‘Jean Delaude’ [cited above] has, however, introduced glaring errors.For example there is the claim that Delmas mentioned a tombstone. He did no such thing. Delmas did though, refer to a supposed tomb-marker which he attributed in some obscure way to the burial of a Great Roman at Rennes-les-Bains, the sister village of Rennes-le-Chateau. In the context of the Sennier letter, which also revolves around a Maraval/Aniort document, this tomb of a Great Roman could very well be that of Constant I - a tomb, as we have seen above, found by a young shepherdess called Catherine Planel whom Labouïsse-Rochefort believed was the source of the Devils treasure legend at Blanchefort. An interesting point is the surname of the 'shepherdess'? It is 'Planel' - a place identified in the Les Pontils area as illustrated in the picture below! One wonders if the shepherdess ever existed?!
I believe also that Paul Saussez has looked for the Bigou document mentioning the transfer of this stone from Les Pontils to Rennes but he did not locate it. Other errors in the DeLaude document are so obvious as to be quite farcical! Are these 'errors' of Plantard and Chérisey because they are trying to make sense of information they have obtained or is it because they are faking information and in the process losing track of other information they have divulged? As their purported 'scam' got bigger and bigger did this lead to confusion in their Priory 'propaganda'?
At least there is one verifiable fact mentioned by Plantard. There did use to be a cemetery at Les Pontils as illustrated below. From here it is an easy process to see how the other elements of the Priory Mythos were added, as the cemetery isnt far from the so called Poussin tomb. This myth surrounds Poussin and a tomb resembling the one depicted in one of his paintings which was alleged to be found in the Les Pontils district!
The siting of the old cemetery at Les Pontils where Plantard said that it is "correct that Abbe Bigou took charge of a stone! In the bishops archives there exists a document in the priest's handwriting bearing on the transfer of this stone by Guillaume TIFFOU from Serres to Rennes-le-Chateau. The engraving in his book by Gerard de Sede via Chesa was tampered with". [Pierre Plantard]. Its interesting then that based on this testimony the stone in question must have been removed from the Les Pontils cemetery to Serres, and then from Serres to Rennes-le-Chateau.
La pierre levee Pontils regarde des attics et aux aux caves du roi - illustration taken from Franck Marie's Etude Critical Rennes-le-Chateau. And actually this is the view seen from the Peyro Dreito stone at Pontils - which is the same view one can see from the so called Poussin Tomb and allegedly the same view being represented by Poussin in his Shepherds of Arcadia Version 2 painting - when facing in the correct direction!
The early story ...
In 1953, after the death of Marie Dénarnaud, the village of Rennes-le-Chateau and its 'magical' history started to 'take off'. This 'magical' history began with the publication of articles in the local press surrounding the recent priest, Berenger Saunière. Alluring and captivating headlines on the "millionaire priest with billions" jumped out at readers. Published at the request of Noel Corbu - evidently to attract customers to the new restaurant he had just opened in the village - it seemed Corbu was only interested in attracting passing trade to this remote hilltop village with stories of the priest and his buried treasure.
But did Corbu actually believe there to be a mystery himself?
Corbu is known to have taken an intense interest in the history of the area and also with the activities of Sauniere. Researchers speculate that Corbu obtained some information direct from Marie Dénarnaud after he befriended her and bought the domain she owned. This was important because Marie was Sauniere's confidante and right hand 'man'.
After the publication of the articles there began to arrive to the village the first wave of early 'researchers'. These included Yves Maraval, Abbé Mazières, Chesa, Descadeillas, Malacan, Bruno [de Monts?], Busques, Rival, Despeyronnat, Cholet, Pellet, Buthion, Dutriat, Domergue, Spiriton, Sorieul, Leconfield, Charroux, Chatillon and some other less well known names. But one of them, Yves Maraval, was said to have information which stemmed not from Noel Corbu and his story of the priest but from his own independent family tradition. This was because Maraval had married into the Aniort family, an important and long lived noble family of the area that had links to the Rennes Affair. The most important link was the marriage of the Aniorts into the family of Marie de Negre. It is specifically Marie de Negre's tombstones that are at the centre of the Rennes-le-Chateau 'story'. Yves Maraval and his family archives seem to impact somehow on the source of later iconic 'legends' relating to Rennes-le-Chateau. And none of this is more evident than in the famous Reddis Cellis stone.
Maraval himself met up with Noel Corbu and together they pooled their knowledge & made surveys and researches in the Rennes area looking for some kind of 'treasure' using a work by Ernest Cros. This work by Ernest Cros has never been seen but two documents claiming to be that report have been found. One of them is on paper that carries the Corbu hotel name and later analysis appears to show that the ink and type came from the typewriter of Noel Corbu. Did Corbu write the mysterious Cros report? Or someone else? Where did the knowledge from this report come? [A fascinating article about this very issue by Patrick Mensoir can be found HERE].
Wiel Vercoulen at http://www.esperazabedandbreakfast.com/Rennes-le-Chateau.html wrote that Monsieur Cros was:
"[an] elderly engineer, a graduate of the Ecole Polytechnique, and a retired railway employee, who used to spend his holidays in Quillan, where his wife owned the baths at Ginoles. He is worthy of mention for the role he played in the Rennes affair. A dedicated archaeologist, fascinated by ancient stones, he accused his friend Berenger Saunière of treating these historical pieces with contempt to the point of placing the "Dalle des Chevaliers" on the floor as a step, exposed to the elements, in front of the base of the statue of the Virgin Mary, and of erasing the inscriptions on the horizontal tombstone of the marquise of Blanchefort. It is thanks to the writings of Mr. Cros that we know of the existence in the cemetery of the gravestone known as the "Et In Arcadia Ego", [i.e. the Reddis Cellis stone] which the abbé erased and had transported to be placed on top of the ossuary. It was also Mr Cros who discovered in the surrounding area the Templar stone of Coumesourde, which, to this day, remains an enigma as regards its presentation as much as its origin."
Another early researcher, Sagarzazu reported that;
"Mrs. Claire Corbu-Captier told me that her father, Noel Corbu and Yves Maraval often went together around the "Pla de Las Brugos" .... They went to the side of the "Cap-de-l'Homme" and they spent whole days conduct[ing] their research. It was certainly ...on a hill numbered on the maps 532, where there was discovered the slab called the "Coume Sourde" by Ernest Cros, in 1928, on the ridge overlooking the field adjoining Saint-Loup, and east along the dirt road that goes ... to La Cabanasse. I say today that there is nothing to discover in these places, apart from a few crosses carved on rocks that outcrop on the ground and all of which have been [already] identified for decoding of the triangulation of the Coume Sourde slab. In the early '60s, a fire ravaged the plateau of Las Brugos - usually a practice noted by shepherds in the area of mountain pastures. The locals, however, suspected Noel Corbu of having lit the fire. This suspicion seems plausible because he certainly set fire to cavities and signs carved on the rocks. This fire, which destroyed all the heather and scrub around the "Pla de Las Brugos" was beneficial because it allowed the cleansing of the rocks which then showed every line of sight of the triangulation of the mysterious coding slab of the "Coume Sourde". This cleansed brush allowed another researcher of 60 years to reconstruct the true triangulation of the slab "Coume Sourde" with a precise identification of crosses engraved on the rocks. SIS meant "Sancto Salvatore Imago" (the holy image of the Saviour) and corresponded to the head of the roughly carved "Cap-de-l'Homme", SAE corresponded to a rock shelter that the locals called "St. Anthony Hermit ", further north, halfway between Cape de l'Homme and the farm of La Cabanasse. The branches of these crosses indicated sight lines leading to other clues in a mysterious treasure hunt. Vegetation and trees that have grown up now ensures that all this is not verifiable except for those who know just where to look for these hidden things"
In 1953, after the death of Marie Dénarnaud, the village of Rennes-le-Chateau and its 'magical' history started to 'take off'. This 'magical' history began with the publication of articles in the local press surrounding the recent priest, Berenger Saunière. Alluring and captivating headlines on the "millionaire priest with billions" jumped out at readers. Published at the request of Noel Corbu - evidently to attract customers to the new restaurant he had just opened in the village - it seemed Corbu was only interested in attracting passing trade to this remote hilltop village with stories of the priest and his buried treasure.
But did Corbu actually believe there to be a mystery himself?
Corbu is known to have taken an intense interest in the history of the area and also with the activities of Sauniere. Researchers speculate that Corbu obtained some information direct from Marie Dénarnaud after he befriended her and bought the domain she owned. This was important because Marie was Sauniere's confidante and right hand 'man'.
After the publication of the articles there began to arrive to the village the first wave of early 'researchers'. These included Yves Maraval, Abbé Mazières, Chesa, Descadeillas, Malacan, Bruno [de Monts?], Busques, Rival, Despeyronnat, Cholet, Pellet, Buthion, Dutriat, Domergue, Spiriton, Sorieul, Leconfield, Charroux, Chatillon and some other less well known names. But one of them, Yves Maraval, was said to have information which stemmed not from Noel Corbu and his story of the priest but from his own independent family tradition. This was because Maraval had married into the Aniort family, an important and long lived noble family of the area that had links to the Rennes Affair. The most important link was the marriage of the Aniorts into the family of Marie de Negre. It is specifically Marie de Negre's tombstones that are at the centre of the Rennes-le-Chateau 'story'. Yves Maraval and his family archives seem to impact somehow on the source of later iconic 'legends' relating to Rennes-le-Chateau. And none of this is more evident than in the famous Reddis Cellis stone.
Maraval himself met up with Noel Corbu and together they pooled their knowledge & made surveys and researches in the Rennes area looking for some kind of 'treasure' using a work by Ernest Cros. This work by Ernest Cros has never been seen but two documents claiming to be that report have been found. One of them is on paper that carries the Corbu hotel name and later analysis appears to show that the ink and type came from the typewriter of Noel Corbu. Did Corbu write the mysterious Cros report? Or someone else? Where did the knowledge from this report come? [A fascinating article about this very issue by Patrick Mensoir can be found HERE].
Wiel Vercoulen at http://www.esperazabedandbreakfast.com/Rennes-le-Chateau.html wrote that Monsieur Cros was:
"[an] elderly engineer, a graduate of the Ecole Polytechnique, and a retired railway employee, who used to spend his holidays in Quillan, where his wife owned the baths at Ginoles. He is worthy of mention for the role he played in the Rennes affair. A dedicated archaeologist, fascinated by ancient stones, he accused his friend Berenger Saunière of treating these historical pieces with contempt to the point of placing the "Dalle des Chevaliers" on the floor as a step, exposed to the elements, in front of the base of the statue of the Virgin Mary, and of erasing the inscriptions on the horizontal tombstone of the marquise of Blanchefort. It is thanks to the writings of Mr. Cros that we know of the existence in the cemetery of the gravestone known as the "Et In Arcadia Ego", [i.e. the Reddis Cellis stone] which the abbé erased and had transported to be placed on top of the ossuary. It was also Mr Cros who discovered in the surrounding area the Templar stone of Coumesourde, which, to this day, remains an enigma as regards its presentation as much as its origin."
Another early researcher, Sagarzazu reported that;
"Mrs. Claire Corbu-Captier told me that her father, Noel Corbu and Yves Maraval often went together around the "Pla de Las Brugos" .... They went to the side of the "Cap-de-l'Homme" and they spent whole days conduct[ing] their research. It was certainly ...on a hill numbered on the maps 532, where there was discovered the slab called the "Coume Sourde" by Ernest Cros, in 1928, on the ridge overlooking the field adjoining Saint-Loup, and east along the dirt road that goes ... to La Cabanasse. I say today that there is nothing to discover in these places, apart from a few crosses carved on rocks that outcrop on the ground and all of which have been [already] identified for decoding of the triangulation of the Coume Sourde slab. In the early '60s, a fire ravaged the plateau of Las Brugos - usually a practice noted by shepherds in the area of mountain pastures. The locals, however, suspected Noel Corbu of having lit the fire. This suspicion seems plausible because he certainly set fire to cavities and signs carved on the rocks. This fire, which destroyed all the heather and scrub around the "Pla de Las Brugos" was beneficial because it allowed the cleansing of the rocks which then showed every line of sight of the triangulation of the mysterious coding slab of the "Coume Sourde". This cleansed brush allowed another researcher of 60 years to reconstruct the true triangulation of the slab "Coume Sourde" with a precise identification of crosses engraved on the rocks. SIS meant "Sancto Salvatore Imago" (the holy image of the Saviour) and corresponded to the head of the roughly carved "Cap-de-l'Homme", SAE corresponded to a rock shelter that the locals called "St. Anthony Hermit ", further north, halfway between Cape de l'Homme and the farm of La Cabanasse. The branches of these crosses indicated sight lines leading to other clues in a mysterious treasure hunt. Vegetation and trees that have grown up now ensures that all this is not verifiable except for those who know just where to look for these hidden things"
Noel Corbu and Yves Maraval often went together around the "Pla de Las Brugos" .... They went to the side of the "Cap-de-l'Homme" and they spent whole days conduct[ing] their research. It was certainly ...on a hill numbered on the maps 532, where there was discovered the slab called the "Coume Sourde" by Ernest Cros, in 1928, on the ridge overlooking the field adjoining Saint-Loup, and east along the dirt road that goes ... to La Cabanasse.
Sagarzazu continues; "Yves Maraval confirmed to me that he had documents. He told me that his knowledge was based on the stories and traditions of his family of the Niort of Sault. Yves Maraval who has been deceased for several years, was convinced, according to the document he possessed that the treasure of Rennes-le-Chateau came from the treasure of the Templars of the Kingdom of Majorca (which included the Roussillon and the Balearics, with Perpignan as its capital). He also believed (wrongly) that the Pierre dressée des Pontils (ie the Peyro Dreto) was part of a triangle of reference (SAE-SIS ) detailed on the Coume Sourde stone discovered by Ernest Cros in 1928 on Hill 532".
There is some confusion between this Reddis Cellis tombstone and the Coumesourde stone. Both stones are reported to carry the same sort of information and carry the Reddis Cellis words. The original descriptions of Cros, however, do not to carry the 'Et in Arcadia Ego' motto. Perhaps this suggests two streams of information about the Rennes Affair involving burial stones over Marie de Negres grave? The first, the 'et in arcadia' horizontal tombstone - the tombstone that Saunière effaced and put in or on an ossuary which Ernest Cros had seen several years earlier and later tried to reconstruct from the villagers' recollections and his own. However, keep in mind that Cros only reconstructed the Reddis Cellis words on the stone - it has never been reported that he reconstructed the words 'et in arcadia ego ..'. So at some point in time the original account has been embellished. (Was this added by Plantard et al, probably to draw attention to Poussin?). The second stone is the CT GIT vertical stone - perhaps manipulated or appropriated by Cherisey.
Linked to this is a comment Plantard made to J-L Chaumeil in 1972. He said;
"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".
So for Plantard the CT GIT tombstone was remade 'to serve the needs of Sauniere's cause'! Whatever does this mean? What cause? It also suggests that there never was a CI GIT headstone. That it was a fake and remade - so how should we interpret 'remade'? This leads on to all sorts of questions about the publication of a copy of the CI GIT stone in a local SESA journal of 1906? Was that fake?
Michel Valet comments on the Maraval connection. He says in his "History of the Treasure of Rennes-le-Chateau" (1985 - p. 307): "... Indeed, through the research of Father Mazieres, we know there is a document of venerable antiquity which is indicating a point from the ""Pierre levée des Pontils". It was known from Count Yves Maraval, because his family seat being the chateau of Niort de Sault (Aude), an eighteenth century mansion [where his family archives were held?] .... Abbé Mazières explained to me that in the archives of Aniort was a document of the tenth century, in which it was indicated that the "Pierre levée des Pontils" looked to the cellars and attics of the king. " I have not however, personally seen this manuscript."
What are the cellars and attics of the king? And which king? Does it mean the cellars and attics of a building, a castle, a chateau? Or perhaps does it mean cellars in a natural cavity in one of the hills or mountains that the 'Pierre levee des Pontils' overlooks? It is interesting to note that in 1990 Plantard wrote to a researcher the following comment - 'I have not undertaken any researches in the Caves de la Reine (in the Rennes district), nor in the Souterrains du Roi ("underground chambers of the King"), so there have not been any researches or investigations on my own property' which perhaps sounds uncannily similar to the 'cellars and attics of the King' in the Maraval document. When Plantard made the acquaintance of Corbu did they discuss this Maraval document? Has Plantard taken and embellished legitimate information he received from Maraval? Or perhaps from Corbu?
I am also reminded that the Reddis Cellis stone is interpreted by some to refer to the 'depot, at Rennes, of the King'. And in fact, both Plantard and Cherisey, in their own respective works, labour the point about the treasure of the Reine (read Queen but phonetically Rennes-le-Chateau or perhaps Rennes-les-Bains) and that of the King. Are they separate? Or linked in some way? Plantard also mentions (in the letter cited above) the Coumesorde stone saying; 'You refer to the tombstone of Coumesourde. I'm sorry to have to disappoint you, but it simply never existed. On the other hand there IS a text dated 1880 or 1890 written by the engineer Ernest Cros based on the Zero Meridian of Paris and the English equivalent in Greenwich (the latter being situated at 9 metres 20.9 seconds west of the Paris Meridian). The triangulation for this study was based at Pontils, between Peyrolles/Serres, at the location of a tomb". Here Plantard is linking the stones to the Paris Meridian with triangulation being based at the location of a tomb at Pontils! It is here that 'someone' made the connection with Poussin and the so called 'Poussin Tomb' not far from the standing stone in the area of Pontils on the commune of Peyrolles.
However, this hardly fits the timeline. It is a confused chronology. What did Cros see in the cemetery when Saunière was alleged to have erased the inscription on the Marie tombstone years before 1908? It certainly was years earlier when Saunière was carrying out his first constructions. Saunière's initial works commenced around 1886-1887. He is supposed to have found Marie de Nègre's epitaph around 1887 - 1889. Around this time Saunière is also said to have 'discovered a tomb', the finding of which he noted in his diary (21st September 1891). When he found this tomb he took a few days off and traveled to see various people which he listed in his diary as the following: "Vu Curé de Névian, Chez Géllis, Chez Carrière, Vu Cros et Secret.” Perhaps the Cros here was Ernest Cros, his friend interested in local archaeology and the person who later reconstructed the Reddis/Cellis stone? On finding this tomb Sauniere proceeded to clear most of the churchyard and rearrange other tombstones and crosses and it seems during this time Saunière would then have obliterated any inscription on Marie de Nègre's epitaph. But which one? The CT GIT tombstone or the Reddis Cellis one or both? And was it related to the 'discovery of a tomb' dated 21st September 1891 or something else entirely? What would have been lying in the cemetery in 1908?
This does not make any sense as a local archaeology group (in 1905) saw the tombstone of Marie de Nègre in the cemetery when they visited the village. This was CT GIT vertical stone. They made no mention of the 'Reddis Cellis' stone. They even published a replica drawing of the vertical tombstone (although suspiciously this drawing does not fit the description given in the text). This all seems to suggest that the article by the archaeology group was somehow fake - this scenario perhaps more likely as the last resting place of Marie de Nègre is not even known for sure. If you cannot find the burial place how can one see the burial stones? Perhaps she was buried in the crypt underneath the church? Remember Plantard's comment regarding the CI GIT stone: "it was remade in 1905 to serve the needs of Sauniere's cause and published at his request in ....1906 for the first time! ". But one has to ask, would Elie Tisseyre, a respectable man who did indeed know Saunière, allow his name to be used in this way?
Much later the journalist Robert Charroux had met with Noel Corbu at Rennes-le-Château and there they discussed Marie's epitaph from information that had been given to them by local villagers. Corbu certainly seemed confused by the epitaph in question. In any case, after Cros had reconstructed his tomb inscription Corbu set about trying to make sense of their meaning. He proposed the following 'translation' - 'At Rennes, (a depot) of the King, in the caves (where is hidden) the citadelle of the Templars'. Another hypothesis, according to Abbe Antoine Beaux, cure of Campagne -sur- Aude and friend of Sauniere, was that this stone tomb's engravings could be interpreted to mean 'At Rennes, in the Chapel, of the citadelle (?castle), foundation of Prayer, for the king' (cited by Franck Marie). These assertions mentioned by Franck Marie had come from the private archives of Abbe Mazieres. From these same archives the tombstone of Marie de Negri d'Ables was described as a reused slab which was somehow related to the area of Les Pontils. What is really meant is, according to Plantard, the Reddis Cellis stone. But why?
There is some confusion between this Reddis Cellis tombstone and the Coumesourde stone. Both stones are reported to carry the same sort of information and carry the Reddis Cellis words. The original descriptions of Cros, however, do not to carry the 'Et in Arcadia Ego' motto. Perhaps this suggests two streams of information about the Rennes Affair involving burial stones over Marie de Negres grave? The first, the 'et in arcadia' horizontal tombstone - the tombstone that Saunière effaced and put in or on an ossuary which Ernest Cros had seen several years earlier and later tried to reconstruct from the villagers' recollections and his own. However, keep in mind that Cros only reconstructed the Reddis Cellis words on the stone - it has never been reported that he reconstructed the words 'et in arcadia ego ..'. So at some point in time the original account has been embellished. (Was this added by Plantard et al, probably to draw attention to Poussin?). The second stone is the CT GIT vertical stone - perhaps manipulated or appropriated by Cherisey.
Linked to this is a comment Plantard made to J-L Chaumeil in 1972. He said;
"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".
So for Plantard the CT GIT tombstone was remade 'to serve the needs of Sauniere's cause'! Whatever does this mean? What cause? It also suggests that there never was a CI GIT headstone. That it was a fake and remade - so how should we interpret 'remade'? This leads on to all sorts of questions about the publication of a copy of the CI GIT stone in a local SESA journal of 1906? Was that fake?
Michel Valet comments on the Maraval connection. He says in his "History of the Treasure of Rennes-le-Chateau" (1985 - p. 307): "... Indeed, through the research of Father Mazieres, we know there is a document of venerable antiquity which is indicating a point from the ""Pierre levée des Pontils". It was known from Count Yves Maraval, because his family seat being the chateau of Niort de Sault (Aude), an eighteenth century mansion [where his family archives were held?] .... Abbé Mazières explained to me that in the archives of Aniort was a document of the tenth century, in which it was indicated that the "Pierre levée des Pontils" looked to the cellars and attics of the king. " I have not however, personally seen this manuscript."
What are the cellars and attics of the king? And which king? Does it mean the cellars and attics of a building, a castle, a chateau? Or perhaps does it mean cellars in a natural cavity in one of the hills or mountains that the 'Pierre levee des Pontils' overlooks? It is interesting to note that in 1990 Plantard wrote to a researcher the following comment - 'I have not undertaken any researches in the Caves de la Reine (in the Rennes district), nor in the Souterrains du Roi ("underground chambers of the King"), so there have not been any researches or investigations on my own property' which perhaps sounds uncannily similar to the 'cellars and attics of the King' in the Maraval document. When Plantard made the acquaintance of Corbu did they discuss this Maraval document? Has Plantard taken and embellished legitimate information he received from Maraval? Or perhaps from Corbu?
I am also reminded that the Reddis Cellis stone is interpreted by some to refer to the 'depot, at Rennes, of the King'. And in fact, both Plantard and Cherisey, in their own respective works, labour the point about the treasure of the Reine (read Queen but phonetically Rennes-le-Chateau or perhaps Rennes-les-Bains) and that of the King. Are they separate? Or linked in some way? Plantard also mentions (in the letter cited above) the Coumesorde stone saying; 'You refer to the tombstone of Coumesourde. I'm sorry to have to disappoint you, but it simply never existed. On the other hand there IS a text dated 1880 or 1890 written by the engineer Ernest Cros based on the Zero Meridian of Paris and the English equivalent in Greenwich (the latter being situated at 9 metres 20.9 seconds west of the Paris Meridian). The triangulation for this study was based at Pontils, between Peyrolles/Serres, at the location of a tomb". Here Plantard is linking the stones to the Paris Meridian with triangulation being based at the location of a tomb at Pontils! It is here that 'someone' made the connection with Poussin and the so called 'Poussin Tomb' not far from the standing stone in the area of Pontils on the commune of Peyrolles.
However, this hardly fits the timeline. It is a confused chronology. What did Cros see in the cemetery when Saunière was alleged to have erased the inscription on the Marie tombstone years before 1908? It certainly was years earlier when Saunière was carrying out his first constructions. Saunière's initial works commenced around 1886-1887. He is supposed to have found Marie de Nègre's epitaph around 1887 - 1889. Around this time Saunière is also said to have 'discovered a tomb', the finding of which he noted in his diary (21st September 1891). When he found this tomb he took a few days off and traveled to see various people which he listed in his diary as the following: "Vu Curé de Névian, Chez Géllis, Chez Carrière, Vu Cros et Secret.” Perhaps the Cros here was Ernest Cros, his friend interested in local archaeology and the person who later reconstructed the Reddis/Cellis stone? On finding this tomb Sauniere proceeded to clear most of the churchyard and rearrange other tombstones and crosses and it seems during this time Saunière would then have obliterated any inscription on Marie de Nègre's epitaph. But which one? The CT GIT tombstone or the Reddis Cellis one or both? And was it related to the 'discovery of a tomb' dated 21st September 1891 or something else entirely? What would have been lying in the cemetery in 1908?
This does not make any sense as a local archaeology group (in 1905) saw the tombstone of Marie de Nègre in the cemetery when they visited the village. This was CT GIT vertical stone. They made no mention of the 'Reddis Cellis' stone. They even published a replica drawing of the vertical tombstone (although suspiciously this drawing does not fit the description given in the text). This all seems to suggest that the article by the archaeology group was somehow fake - this scenario perhaps more likely as the last resting place of Marie de Nègre is not even known for sure. If you cannot find the burial place how can one see the burial stones? Perhaps she was buried in the crypt underneath the church? Remember Plantard's comment regarding the CI GIT stone: "it was remade in 1905 to serve the needs of Sauniere's cause and published at his request in ....1906 for the first time! ". But one has to ask, would Elie Tisseyre, a respectable man who did indeed know Saunière, allow his name to be used in this way?
Much later the journalist Robert Charroux had met with Noel Corbu at Rennes-le-Château and there they discussed Marie's epitaph from information that had been given to them by local villagers. Corbu certainly seemed confused by the epitaph in question. In any case, after Cros had reconstructed his tomb inscription Corbu set about trying to make sense of their meaning. He proposed the following 'translation' - 'At Rennes, (a depot) of the King, in the caves (where is hidden) the citadelle of the Templars'. Another hypothesis, according to Abbe Antoine Beaux, cure of Campagne -sur- Aude and friend of Sauniere, was that this stone tomb's engravings could be interpreted to mean 'At Rennes, in the Chapel, of the citadelle (?castle), foundation of Prayer, for the king' (cited by Franck Marie). These assertions mentioned by Franck Marie had come from the private archives of Abbe Mazieres. From these same archives the tombstone of Marie de Negri d'Ables was described as a reused slab which was somehow related to the area of Les Pontils. What is really meant is, according to Plantard, the Reddis Cellis stone. But why?
An old Napoleonic Cadastre map may hold a clue. It mentions or cites a cemetery in the vicinity of Les Pontils and perhaps this is where the burial stone may have come from or at least to have been connected in some way. The Cadastre map is pictured below, borrowed from the following website (with permission): http://www.renne-le-chateau.com/document/images/pontil_b.jpg
As you can see the placement of this Les Pontils cemetery is located some distance from the orignal hamlet of Les Pontils and any existing village. It is also located away from that other famous tomb of Pontils (the so called Poussin Tomb). However, conspicuous by its absence in the work of Henri Boudet is the standing stone called the Peyro-Dreito - a megalithic standing stone located at Les Pontils. This standing stone takes on some significance for the Maraval's - as it is this stone said to be orientated to oversee the treasure of Rennes!
Before the French Revolution this Pontils fief was owned by the Joyeuse family - as recorded in the dictionary published by Sabarthèse. The Joyeuse family are linked to the tomb at Arques, which usually refers to the tomb 'of Poussin' or a tomb at Pontils! (see below).
Before the French Revolution this Pontils fief was owned by the Joyeuse family - as recorded in the dictionary published by Sabarthèse. The Joyeuse family are linked to the tomb at Arques, which usually refers to the tomb 'of Poussin' or a tomb at Pontils! (see below).
The historian Louis Fèdiè in his "Le Comte de Razes" wrote that there was thought to be a cavity close to the Peyro-Dreito menhir at Les Pontils, a natural cave or perhaps one formed and carved out by man. He wrote that this standing stone exists in the territory of the municipality of Peyrolles and is shaped like a truncated obelisk and slightly inclined. It measures about 2 m 85 cm, and its circumference is 2m. He said "We must mention a circumstance which has greatly impressed us. Around and almost at the base of the monument, the ground seems firm and topped with inlaid stones, and presents a singular phenomenon. It sounds hollow under horses' feet, as if the rider has passed over a vault. Is it near a Celtic stone cave carved by nature? Or is it the hand of the man who searched on this and dug a cavity of a certain size?"
Fèdiè also thought that the locality of Peyrolles, which is the name of the commune that Les Pontils and its vicinity are located on, stemmed from a barbaric Latin term Peyra Olla signifying 'stone funeral urn'. Pierre Jarnac thought that the name was formed from the two words "Peire ola" meaning "tomb stone". If true this may suggest a funerary and sacred tradition anciently associated with the place. Perhaps the burial of an ancient king? Had the Reddis-Cellis stone something to do with this - and when moved to Rennes became associated with the grave of Marie de Negre?
Fèdiè also thought that the locality of Peyrolles, which is the name of the commune that Les Pontils and its vicinity are located on, stemmed from a barbaric Latin term Peyra Olla signifying 'stone funeral urn'. Pierre Jarnac thought that the name was formed from the two words "Peire ola" meaning "tomb stone". If true this may suggest a funerary and sacred tradition anciently associated with the place. Perhaps the burial of an ancient king? Had the Reddis-Cellis stone something to do with this - and when moved to Rennes became associated with the grave of Marie de Negre?
Reconstructed tombstone by Cros of a stone laying on the burial plot of Marie de Negre stated to contain 'Latin characters'. None are shown here. His document signalled the appearance of two typewritten documents providing diagrams of the Coume-Sourde “Stone” entitled ‘The Cros Report’ (because it was ascribed to Ernest Cros, 1852-1946, provenance of which is unknown), sometime between 1962-1972. One version of the document coming from the typewriter of Noël Corbu bearing the letterhead of the Hotel de La Tour, the other in the possession of René Chésa.
Maraval and Corbu working together - with Maraval supplying information from his family archives and Corbu perhaps supplying information from Denarnaud exploited these legends of treasure at Rennes and the life of Sauniere. So far the names of Plantard and Cherisey are not mentioned. I find this intriguing as most of today's researchers will almost unanimously tell you that the modern incarnation of the Rennes 'mystery' and its component parts start with Plantard and Cherisey. But here we have independent researchers [a little before Plantard was on the scene locally] suggesting that a view of the landscape from Pontils towards Cardou and Rennes-le-Chateau is somehow associated with a 'treasure'. This view is looking from the location of the Peyro-Dreito. This is all based on a document from the Maraval archives which admittedly no-one seems to have seen.
Did Plantard and Cherisey later turn this knowledge of the view from Peyro-Dreito into the view from the so-called Poussin tomb near Pontils into an association with a painting by Nicolas Poussin, which they claimed was significant in some way?
As one can readily see there is plenty here for the mythology of the treasure of Rennes-le-Château to be built on. All of these details are all the more interesting when we realise that at some point an unidentified person or persons had linked this area to the phrase 'Et in Arcadia Ego...' - a phrase found in a famous painting by Nicolas Poussin. And in fact, as we know, just a little further up from the Peyro-Dreito standing stone a tomb was built which seemed to replicate the tomb in the actual Poussin painting and a panorama that Poussin was supposed to have painted. Poussin was alleged to 'hold the key'.....
But this linking of Pontils and a treasure at Rennes to Poussin isnt actually so far-fetched. Why? Because of the involvement of Blaise d'Hautpoul - which we will see below!
Researchers spend an inordinate amount of time trying to show that this tomb was really painted in this area by Nicolas Poussin in the 17th century. In fact Plantard had already given us the key .... he said "the question then is not whether Poussin actually came and painted the landscape of Rennes-le-Chateau - but whether in his painting 'Shepherds of Arcadia' a secret pertaining to Rennes-le-Chateau was being concealed". The mystery really is that anyone since the time of the 'Reddis Cellis' stone and the connection with Les Pontils could have put two and two together and invented a connection with the Poussin tomb and painting. Does this also mean that same person 'invented' the parchment ciphers? If some researchers think that the CI GIT Marie de Negre tombstone was an invention by Sauniere (or anyone else for that matter during the time span of 1905/1906) then did Sauniere invent the parchments? Because one needs this tombstone to break the secret code in the so-called Sauniere Parchments.
Bérenger Saunière defaced the burial stone[s] of Marie de Nègre d’Ables as part of refurbishments he was carrying out to the church of Mary Magdalene and its cemetery. After finding some documents or parchments in a pillar in the church [see HERE] Saunière was advised to go to Paris on the recommendation of his Bishop. On his return Saunière continued the restoration of his dilapidated church (after also employing a new workforce) - and also undertaking to do much of the work himself. It was around this time that he is said to have ‘found a tomb’. He cleared most of the churchyard and rearranged tombstones and crosses. As a part of this exercise Saunière is alleged to have ‘obliterated ...an inscription’ on Marie de Nègre’s tombstone. Plantard said:
"This is the one which was defaced by the parish priest, Sauniere, in January 1895, then placed by him on the ossuary which he had had constructed by Elie Bot, treated chemically and photographed by infrared in September 1966 which revealed the following text .... ".
This defaced inscription was essential for the decoding of the parchments that Saunière was supposed to have found earlier. The story of these ’parchments’ are believed to have a much older pedigree. They relate to papers that Marie de Nègre may have had in her possession and which she gave to Abbé Antoine Bigou for safekeeping. However, according to another Plantard testimony - the Reddis Cellis stone is NOT the stone defaced by Sauniere. What is more - Certainly one of the tombstones, reproduced on page 60 ...... is authentic (Reddis-Regis): everyone knows that it had been engraved about 1686 on the order of Henry d'Hautpoul". The fake tombstone that Sauniere created would have been the CI GIT headstone! This one was 'remade in 1905 to serve the needs of Sauniere's cause and published at his request in ....1906 for the first time!" . Which one is the correct tombstone? I have already highlighted [elsewhere on this site] the complete and utter seemingly deliberate confusion of these stones and their history!
Did Plantard and Cherisey later turn this knowledge of the view from Peyro-Dreito into the view from the so-called Poussin tomb near Pontils into an association with a painting by Nicolas Poussin, which they claimed was significant in some way?
As one can readily see there is plenty here for the mythology of the treasure of Rennes-le-Château to be built on. All of these details are all the more interesting when we realise that at some point an unidentified person or persons had linked this area to the phrase 'Et in Arcadia Ego...' - a phrase found in a famous painting by Nicolas Poussin. And in fact, as we know, just a little further up from the Peyro-Dreito standing stone a tomb was built which seemed to replicate the tomb in the actual Poussin painting and a panorama that Poussin was supposed to have painted. Poussin was alleged to 'hold the key'.....
But this linking of Pontils and a treasure at Rennes to Poussin isnt actually so far-fetched. Why? Because of the involvement of Blaise d'Hautpoul - which we will see below!
Researchers spend an inordinate amount of time trying to show that this tomb was really painted in this area by Nicolas Poussin in the 17th century. In fact Plantard had already given us the key .... he said "the question then is not whether Poussin actually came and painted the landscape of Rennes-le-Chateau - but whether in his painting 'Shepherds of Arcadia' a secret pertaining to Rennes-le-Chateau was being concealed". The mystery really is that anyone since the time of the 'Reddis Cellis' stone and the connection with Les Pontils could have put two and two together and invented a connection with the Poussin tomb and painting. Does this also mean that same person 'invented' the parchment ciphers? If some researchers think that the CI GIT Marie de Negre tombstone was an invention by Sauniere (or anyone else for that matter during the time span of 1905/1906) then did Sauniere invent the parchments? Because one needs this tombstone to break the secret code in the so-called Sauniere Parchments.
Bérenger Saunière defaced the burial stone[s] of Marie de Nègre d’Ables as part of refurbishments he was carrying out to the church of Mary Magdalene and its cemetery. After finding some documents or parchments in a pillar in the church [see HERE] Saunière was advised to go to Paris on the recommendation of his Bishop. On his return Saunière continued the restoration of his dilapidated church (after also employing a new workforce) - and also undertaking to do much of the work himself. It was around this time that he is said to have ‘found a tomb’. He cleared most of the churchyard and rearranged tombstones and crosses. As a part of this exercise Saunière is alleged to have ‘obliterated ...an inscription’ on Marie de Nègre’s tombstone. Plantard said:
"This is the one which was defaced by the parish priest, Sauniere, in January 1895, then placed by him on the ossuary which he had had constructed by Elie Bot, treated chemically and photographed by infrared in September 1966 which revealed the following text .... ".
This defaced inscription was essential for the decoding of the parchments that Saunière was supposed to have found earlier. The story of these ’parchments’ are believed to have a much older pedigree. They relate to papers that Marie de Nègre may have had in her possession and which she gave to Abbé Antoine Bigou for safekeeping. However, according to another Plantard testimony - the Reddis Cellis stone is NOT the stone defaced by Sauniere. What is more - Certainly one of the tombstones, reproduced on page 60 ...... is authentic (Reddis-Regis): everyone knows that it had been engraved about 1686 on the order of Henry d'Hautpoul". The fake tombstone that Sauniere created would have been the CI GIT headstone! This one was 'remade in 1905 to serve the needs of Sauniere's cause and published at his request in ....1906 for the first time!" . Which one is the correct tombstone? I have already highlighted [elsewhere on this site] the complete and utter seemingly deliberate confusion of these stones and their history!
We at least have evidence of an ancient cemetery at Les Pontils as noted above. If the CI GIT stone has never been seen (especially if the SESA article is not valid in some way ) then the only evidence of a tombstone being 'seen' is the 'Et in Arcadia'/Reddis stone. Monsieur CROS was said to have restored the original text on the stone with the help of some villagers from Rennes. CROS had written in his notebooks;
'The locals told me - 'there were other vertical letters, but we cant tell you what they meant. We were told the letters were Greek but we didn't understand anything'.
CROS went on to say - 'Personally i do not think the letters were Greek, but rather Kabalistic Templar signs .....'
But ah, the irony. No one has ever seen the original notebooks of Ernest Cros. Why not? Because the appearance of two typewritten documents providing diagrams of the Coume-Sourde “Stone” entitled ‘The Cros Report’ (because it was ascribed to Ernest Cros, 1852-1946, provenance of which is unknown), sometime between 1962-1972 had as one version the document coming from the typewriter of Noël Corbu bearing the letterhead of the Hotel de La Tour and another second version supposedly in the possession of René Chésa. Philippe de Chérisey, in Pierre et Papier said: “That Mr Cros existed is one thing, that the small wad of typed pages was from a typewriter that he would have used himself, is another. As far as I know, as I held these pages in my hands, they could equally be my work, which I could have passed to Mr Noël Corbu in Rennes-le-Château in exactly the same manner that I forwarded Documents I and II to Gérard de Sède”.
'The locals told me - 'there were other vertical letters, but we cant tell you what they meant. We were told the letters were Greek but we didn't understand anything'.
CROS went on to say - 'Personally i do not think the letters were Greek, but rather Kabalistic Templar signs .....'
But ah, the irony. No one has ever seen the original notebooks of Ernest Cros. Why not? Because the appearance of two typewritten documents providing diagrams of the Coume-Sourde “Stone” entitled ‘The Cros Report’ (because it was ascribed to Ernest Cros, 1852-1946, provenance of which is unknown), sometime between 1962-1972 had as one version the document coming from the typewriter of Noël Corbu bearing the letterhead of the Hotel de La Tour and another second version supposedly in the possession of René Chésa. Philippe de Chérisey, in Pierre et Papier said: “That Mr Cros existed is one thing, that the small wad of typed pages was from a typewriter that he would have used himself, is another. As far as I know, as I held these pages in my hands, they could equally be my work, which I could have passed to Mr Noël Corbu in Rennes-le-Château in exactly the same manner that I forwarded Documents I and II to Gérard de Sède”.
Henry of Hautpoul
The other interesting piece of information that Plantard has offered up is the suggestion that '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'.
Who is this Henry of Hautpoul? And why would Plantard suggest that it was HE who engraved the Reddis-Cellis stone?
Henry was son of Blaise d'Hautpoul. All lovers of the mystery of Rennes know Blaise at least in name, for his is a very special case. Just after the year 1645, there was supposed to have been a discovery of a fabulous treasure by the shepherd Ignace Paris, in one version, and a shepherdess in a second version, on land owned by Blaise d'Hautpoul. A writer, Labouisse-Rochefort, told in 1832 of the legend of the treasure of Blanchefort that was protected by the devil. This legend dated back to the late eighteenth century and takes place in the castle of Blanchefort, located a few miles from Rennes-les-Bains. The devil's treasure was 19 and a half million gold coins and a shepherdess surprised him one day when he was counting out his gold coins. By the time the villagers were called to see the spectacle the devil and the treasure had disappeared. The farmers appealed to a sorcerer in Limoux to enter into a relationship with Satan to recover the treasure, which he accepted only on the condition that he be assisted by his countrymen, but the 'sorcerer' could not count on their support because they fled frightened, after hearing the noise made by the demon. The experiment was abandoned.
Since then, a/the devil is always central to the treasure hidden in the ruins of Blanchefort.
Another 'version' of the legend tells that in 1645 a shepherd of Rennes-le-Château named Ignace Paris had lost one of his sheep. When he saw that it had disappeared, he decided to go looking for it and thanks to the bleating of the animal, he spotted it in the bottom of a hole. He cautiously descended into the hole and found himself in a cave. The animal was there but so too were many skeletons and then the shepherd noticed that the ground was covered with gold.
Paris, without hesitation, filled his pockets, his wallet and his beret and immediately went to tell his story to the villagers. After many questions, he refused to reveal the location of his find, and the people were perplexed by this story of rapid fortune, and they, believing he had done some trading with the devil, stoned him. The treasure of Paris remained buried deep in a crevice.
And yet another variation of this story says that Henry Hautpoul, eager to know where the treasure was buried - had the shepherd tortured to answer questions about the find but the shepherd died of his torture/injuries without revealing his secret.
So we have several legends concerning the Hautpoul family, specifically Blaise Hautpoul and Henry Hautpoul, father and son respectively. One revolves around Blanchefort and Rennes-les-Bains and a shepherdess [which would appear to refer to Catherine Planel and the tomb of a Great Roman], the other a shepherd and Rennes-le-Chateau. It becomes all the more intriguing when we realise that there were some strange events surrounding these the Hautpouls in 'real history'. Here is some interesting chronology with some Priory propaganda thrown in:
October 9th 1644 Antoine Delmas born
23/11/1644 - the famous testament of Francois Pierre d'Hautpoul is registered by the notary of Esperaza, Captier. This is said to be one of the parchments found by Sauniere many years later!
1646 - Blaise Hautpoul, son of Francois, has the church at Rennes-le-Chateau restored and in this endeavour was helped by Nicolas Pavillon.
November 1661 - Blaise Hautpoul goes to court against Nicolas Pavillon, bishop of Alet, to prevent the Kings troops (Louis XIVth) searching and trampling over his lands and mines. Blaise's lands and possessions include Rennes, St Just, Le Bezu, les Bains (Rennes-les-Bains), Montferrand, Montazels and La Val Dieu. The long and complex trial will end in Grenoble in April 1666 to the advantage of Nicolas Pavillon, but after King breaks the judgments in favour of the bishop. This historical fact deserves to be noted as Louis XIVth and Nicolas Pavillon were particularly opposed. Why then give a judgment in favour of his opponent?
December 1669 Antoine Delmas made a priest by Nicolas Pavillon
November 1672 Antone Delmas made priest of Rennes-les-Bains
1678 - Louis XIVth's treasurer, Colbert, creates a mining company to prospect on the land of the Hautpouls.
1685 - Louis XIVth buys Poussin's 'Shepherds of Arcadia' from CA Herault.
1686 - Henry Hautpoul has the 'Reddis Cellis' stone engraved!
1709 - Antoine Delmas publishes his manuscript on Rennes-les-Bains and the Great Roman.
1789 - the Reddis Cellis stone is transported [from Les Pontils] to the cemetery at Rennes-le-Château. From 1789 to 1895, this stone was found on the grave of the Marquise of Blanchefort, in the cemetery of Rennes-le-Château, near the bell tower.
1832 - Auguste de Labouïsse-Rochefort publishes his book Voyage à Rennes-les-Bains, but possibly first written in 1803 - and mentions ‘The Legend of the Devil’s Treasure’ (cited above). Labouïsse-Rochefort himself was admitted to the Arcadian Academy in 1832, commenting on the event: "A Shepherd of Arcady by the gentle inclination of my heart, I could not help but want to be a member of this illustrious Arcadian Academy". He even referred to the land around Rennes-les-Bains as like Arcadia. Auguste de Labouïsse-Rochefort added [in regards to the legend of the Devils Treasure] - "The annoying thing about this affair was that M. de Fleury, then Lord of the villages of Montferrand, Bains, Rennes, as well as the ruins of Blanchefort, wanted to bring an action against them for having attempted to violate his lands…" which echo suspiciously the trial of Blaise Hautpoul and Nicolas Pavillon some 200 years earlier! Is there a suggestion that these events are inter-related or concern the same underground current?
Cherisey wrote elsewhere that:
"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, 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 bequeathes 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."
In MATHIEU PAOLI's 'LES DESSOUS D'UNE AMBITION POLITIQUE' the original 1973 publication says on page 37 the following (in relation to Paul Francois - Vincent de Fleury):
'the nobility dictionary indicates that the family of the Fleury is a Languedocian familly, with obscure precise origins. In the Spainish archives, it is mentioned that a Fleury, was a commander of the Order of the Temple at Carcassonne, at the beginning of the 14th century'. This Fleury family which is listed in the ' L’Armorial de Languedoc' has Paul-François-Vincent's grandmother as Marguerite de Rosset. She was the daughter of Bernardin de Rosset and Marie de Fleury, the sister of Cardinal Fleury. So although the two Fleury families have different origins, there was a union between them by marriage. Paul-François-Vincent was thus indeed the great-grandnephew of Cardinal Fleury - not via his Grandfather Fleury, but rather through his Grandmother Rosset!
The M. de Fleury mentioned by Auguste de Labouïsse-Rochefort who was the then Lord of the villages of Montferrand, Bains, Rennes, as well as the ruins of Blanchefort, at the time of his Devil Treasure story certainly married one of the descendants of Henry and Blaise Hautpoul - and he faced the same issues of people searching and pillaging his lands as his antecedents did! Later, Paul Urbain de Fleury, son of Paul François Vincent Fleury and Gabrielle Hautpoul Blanchefort bought the castle at Rennes abandoned by her aunt Mary. He also, rather strangely, has two graves in the cemetery at Rennes-les-Bains.
Hautpoul and its origins
While i was looking at the members of the Hautpoul family and the history of their origins, i of course knew that their genealogy could be traced back to 930. The name is attested in Hautpoul's records from 930. In 960 Bernard Raymond Hautpoul's negotiates a peace treaty between the King of France and the principal lords of the Languedoc. In 1096, Pierre-Raymond Hautpoul goes on Crusade to Antioch, Palestine during the First Crusade. But it is in the twelfth century that Hautpouls fate is sealed. A dissenting Christian religion develops in the Languedoc: the Cathars. Hautpoul's, its lords, and its people, adhere to the Cathar faith. Considered a heresy by the omnipotence of the Catholic Church, the Cathars are condemned and persecuted practitioners. Thus, the "crusade against the Albigensians" is a major event in medieval Occitan. Hautpoul, which is one of the strongholds attacked by the troops of Simon de Montfort, underwent a very hard siege in 1212 & for several days the village is bombarded by a catapult, occupied and burned.
Associating the family of the early Hautpouls and the village of Hautpoul with the Albigensians throws up all sorts of suggestions regarding the 'affair at Rennes'. Why? Because some of the Cathar families can be traced back to Alanic families of the 4th and 5th century who were in the army of the Visigothic king Alaric I. These Alanic families also had access to the fabled treasure of Alaric and something called the Holy Grail. These motifs appear frequently in the affair of Rennes! The town of Hautpoul itself is said to have been created by a Visigothic king, Ataulph.
Since ancient times, Hautpoul has been an observatory and defensive outpost of the first order: the rocky outcrop allows watch over the valleys of Thore, of Arnette, the Linoubre and Arn. Control towards the Albigensian is required. There are no reliable text which mention Hautpoul before the tenth century but its strategic position could be operated successively by the Volscians, the Romans and the Visigoths. The Romans may have contributed to the formation of Hautpoul's name: the name " Altpol " is attested in the sixth century and becomes "Hautpoul" - the corruption of the Latin "altum podium" (high hill). An old legend tells that Hautpoul was founded by Athaulf, king of the Visigoths in 413 . Later, from the sixth to the eighth century's, the border of Visigothic Septimania probably stopped at the crest of the Black Mountains, south of Mazamet. After 533, during the reign of King Childebert I (4th son of Clovis ) Hautpoul was a Frankish area. There are clues, you can see, in Hautpoul's architecture where some strata in some of the walls replicate the same patterns used by the Romans (opus spicatum) found also in Visigothic architecture. It is assumed that the Visigoths of Septimania were able to extend their dominion to Hautpoul and that they raised its defenses in the seventh century.
Athaulf
Athaulf belongs to the noble family of the Balthes. According to Zosimus he was the brother of King Alaric whom he succeeded. Jordanes describes Athaulf as a remarkable man, both by the superiority of his mind and his beauty .
At the end of the year 410, after the sack of Rome (August, 410), the Visigoths are in the south of Italy; Alaric has plans to gain Roman Africa through Sicily. But he died at that time and was buried near Cosenza. Athaulf, who is elected leader of the Visigoths after the death of Alaric, waives the African project and takes the Visigoths back to northern Italy, then in 412, he travels into Gaul, where the Visigoths remove the usurpers Jovin and Sebastian in Provence and the Aquitaine (413).
Shortly after the 1 January 414, in Narbonne, Athaulf married with great pomp Galla Placidia, the daughter of Emperor Theodosius (379-395) and half-sister of the Western Roman emperor Honorius, who had been captured by the Visigoths in 410. According to Jordanes, he had already married her in Italy, Forlì (Forum Livii), perhaps by a Germanic procedure. The ceremony in Narbonne was a lavish and famous affair and eyewitnesses said that treasure from the Visigothic looted Treasure of Jerusalem was used in the banquet ceremony.
The Visigoths then under pressure from Constance, a general in the service of Honorius, go to Narbonne and they spend time in Spain and then move on to take Barcelona in December 414. In 414 or early 415, Galla Placidia has a son who is given the significant name of Theodosius (Theodosius). But he died in infancy, most likely murdered at the instigation of a noble Visigoth faction hostile to Athaulf, which would, according to them, desire to "restore the Roman Empire through Gothic force " and they place his son on the imperial throne.
In 415 Athaulf himself is murdered betrayed by one of his officers. According to the chronicle of the Visigoth kings (Chronica regum Wisigotthorum) Ataulphus reigned 6 years. The new king, Sigeric reigns just 7 days before being murdered also on behalf of the feuding Germans by supporters of Athaulf. The noble Wallia, also of the balthe family, is elected king. Wallia, king of the Visigoths (415 - 418), is the son of Modaharius, a noble Visigoth of high lineage who may also have been related to the sacred family of the Balthes, some sources say he is the brother of Athaulf. Wallia's wife was also a noble belonging to this prestigious family. He is the grandfather of Ricimer .
The Balthes (meaning bold ) are along with the Amali, the two major Gothic lineages. The Balthes gave the Visigoths several kings until Amalaric died in 531, and the latter's daughter, Goswinthe, became the wife of King Visigoth Athanagild, who reigned from 554 to 567. On the death of Athanagild she becomes the wife of King Leovigild, reigning jointly with his brother from 567 and one of 572 to his death in 586. The Burgundian Clotilde, who became a Frankish queen, is also related to the lineage. Clothilde married the Merovingian king Clovis.
Edward Gibbon in Chapter 30, footnote to page # 4 of his History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire wrote : "This illustrious line continued to expand in France, in the Gothic province of Septimania, or Languedoc, under the misnomer of Baux, and a branch of the family then moved into the kingdom of Naples . The lords of Baux, near Arles and with seventy-nine known places remained independent of the Counts of Provence".
Perhaps these legends of Hautpoul, the Visigoths and their lost treasure and associated ancient families are all interlinked? I am reminded of the announcement made at http://www.lemercuredegaillon.net/gaillon27/dossier_blancassalz.htm - who reported an ‘exclusive announcement’ to listeners of Jean-Claude Carton on the radio station IDFM98 (Radio Enghien) June 3rd.
"It seems a ‘secret site’ has been found directly linked to Saunière through the recent papers that have come to light including the Book of Tobit auction material. No place name has been announced on the radio and it has not been announced on the website. This is to protect the site from pillaging or destruction. A report has been submitted to Boistel, a notary in Gaillon, who recorded a deed to assert the right to the site. This file, called "Blancassalz" ensures that the site is now protected against any attack.
The authorities have been informed.
The site is said to have been first found by Abbé Berenger Saunière priest of Rennes-le-Château in 1891, following the discovery of certain documents in his church during restoration works. The contents of the original site indirectly linked to the origin of the sudden wealth of the priest Saunière. Namely (?the site) was commissioned and paid for by an organization (or a conglomerate of organizations) in order to restore and maintain the place in a filing sent secretly from generation to generation among the noble families of the area until the Revolution.
That is to say the lords of Rennes - the Hautpoul (Seyres Félines) de Bugarach, de Voisins, de Fleury - Blanchefort, de Montesquieu, de Joyeuse & de la Rochefoucauld. These families received this mission from the beginning of the fourteenth century. The sponsors were the Templars, the key secret stakeholders in 1307.
Saunière, having found the site through documents found in his church, made sure to hide again the Treasury by ‘moving’ it. He then designed/produced new encrypted documents, known as the "Small and Large Parchments"(i.e. the documents first made available by Plantard and Chérisey), which suggested a symbolic treasure hunt so that his discovery would not be completely lost after him.
The repository, made up of relics, archives, religious material of a Christian and/or Jewish variety, is to the credit of the Knights Templar. They found these in their archaeological research in the Holy Land, including the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Palestine, Egypt and Ethiopia and then brought them to France. For the moment no physical deposit has been found, no excavation has been undertaken. Everything will be done legally. The permits will be sought in due course".
The researchers concluded: As I have always maintained, it is unlikely that the deposit has remained in place. Assuming that Saunière had found the cache, he will have moved all its content elsewhere. There is probably nothing at this site now. If there is evidence that the cache has been emptied by Abbé Saunière, traces may remain, however, the obligation to protect the site against any attack and vandalism. The place is an archaeological site. The location of the new cache has been transcribed in the second coding inserted in the large parchment. It will not be revealed now".
Perhaps the Maraval document which cites a Reddis/Cellis stone and the "Pierre levée des Pontils" [that] looks to the cellars and attics of the king" suggests a king of the Visigoths and his treasure?
The other interesting piece of information that Plantard has offered up is the suggestion that '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'.
Who is this Henry of Hautpoul? And why would Plantard suggest that it was HE who engraved the Reddis-Cellis stone?
Henry was son of Blaise d'Hautpoul. All lovers of the mystery of Rennes know Blaise at least in name, for his is a very special case. Just after the year 1645, there was supposed to have been a discovery of a fabulous treasure by the shepherd Ignace Paris, in one version, and a shepherdess in a second version, on land owned by Blaise d'Hautpoul. A writer, Labouisse-Rochefort, told in 1832 of the legend of the treasure of Blanchefort that was protected by the devil. This legend dated back to the late eighteenth century and takes place in the castle of Blanchefort, located a few miles from Rennes-les-Bains. The devil's treasure was 19 and a half million gold coins and a shepherdess surprised him one day when he was counting out his gold coins. By the time the villagers were called to see the spectacle the devil and the treasure had disappeared. The farmers appealed to a sorcerer in Limoux to enter into a relationship with Satan to recover the treasure, which he accepted only on the condition that he be assisted by his countrymen, but the 'sorcerer' could not count on their support because they fled frightened, after hearing the noise made by the demon. The experiment was abandoned.
Since then, a/the devil is always central to the treasure hidden in the ruins of Blanchefort.
Another 'version' of the legend tells that in 1645 a shepherd of Rennes-le-Château named Ignace Paris had lost one of his sheep. When he saw that it had disappeared, he decided to go looking for it and thanks to the bleating of the animal, he spotted it in the bottom of a hole. He cautiously descended into the hole and found himself in a cave. The animal was there but so too were many skeletons and then the shepherd noticed that the ground was covered with gold.
Paris, without hesitation, filled his pockets, his wallet and his beret and immediately went to tell his story to the villagers. After many questions, he refused to reveal the location of his find, and the people were perplexed by this story of rapid fortune, and they, believing he had done some trading with the devil, stoned him. The treasure of Paris remained buried deep in a crevice.
And yet another variation of this story says that Henry Hautpoul, eager to know where the treasure was buried - had the shepherd tortured to answer questions about the find but the shepherd died of his torture/injuries without revealing his secret.
So we have several legends concerning the Hautpoul family, specifically Blaise Hautpoul and Henry Hautpoul, father and son respectively. One revolves around Blanchefort and Rennes-les-Bains and a shepherdess [which would appear to refer to Catherine Planel and the tomb of a Great Roman], the other a shepherd and Rennes-le-Chateau. It becomes all the more intriguing when we realise that there were some strange events surrounding these the Hautpouls in 'real history'. Here is some interesting chronology with some Priory propaganda thrown in:
October 9th 1644 Antoine Delmas born
23/11/1644 - the famous testament of Francois Pierre d'Hautpoul is registered by the notary of Esperaza, Captier. This is said to be one of the parchments found by Sauniere many years later!
1646 - Blaise Hautpoul, son of Francois, has the church at Rennes-le-Chateau restored and in this endeavour was helped by Nicolas Pavillon.
November 1661 - Blaise Hautpoul goes to court against Nicolas Pavillon, bishop of Alet, to prevent the Kings troops (Louis XIVth) searching and trampling over his lands and mines. Blaise's lands and possessions include Rennes, St Just, Le Bezu, les Bains (Rennes-les-Bains), Montferrand, Montazels and La Val Dieu. The long and complex trial will end in Grenoble in April 1666 to the advantage of Nicolas Pavillon, but after King breaks the judgments in favour of the bishop. This historical fact deserves to be noted as Louis XIVth and Nicolas Pavillon were particularly opposed. Why then give a judgment in favour of his opponent?
December 1669 Antoine Delmas made a priest by Nicolas Pavillon
November 1672 Antone Delmas made priest of Rennes-les-Bains
1678 - Louis XIVth's treasurer, Colbert, creates a mining company to prospect on the land of the Hautpouls.
1685 - Louis XIVth buys Poussin's 'Shepherds of Arcadia' from CA Herault.
1686 - Henry Hautpoul has the 'Reddis Cellis' stone engraved!
1709 - Antoine Delmas publishes his manuscript on Rennes-les-Bains and the Great Roman.
1789 - the Reddis Cellis stone is transported [from Les Pontils] to the cemetery at Rennes-le-Château. From 1789 to 1895, this stone was found on the grave of the Marquise of Blanchefort, in the cemetery of Rennes-le-Château, near the bell tower.
1832 - Auguste de Labouïsse-Rochefort publishes his book Voyage à Rennes-les-Bains, but possibly first written in 1803 - and mentions ‘The Legend of the Devil’s Treasure’ (cited above). Labouïsse-Rochefort himself was admitted to the Arcadian Academy in 1832, commenting on the event: "A Shepherd of Arcady by the gentle inclination of my heart, I could not help but want to be a member of this illustrious Arcadian Academy". He even referred to the land around Rennes-les-Bains as like Arcadia. Auguste de Labouïsse-Rochefort added [in regards to the legend of the Devils Treasure] - "The annoying thing about this affair was that M. de Fleury, then Lord of the villages of Montferrand, Bains, Rennes, as well as the ruins of Blanchefort, wanted to bring an action against them for having attempted to violate his lands…" which echo suspiciously the trial of Blaise Hautpoul and Nicolas Pavillon some 200 years earlier! Is there a suggestion that these events are inter-related or concern the same underground current?
Cherisey wrote elsewhere that:
"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, 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 bequeathes 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."
In MATHIEU PAOLI's 'LES DESSOUS D'UNE AMBITION POLITIQUE' the original 1973 publication says on page 37 the following (in relation to Paul Francois - Vincent de Fleury):
'the nobility dictionary indicates that the family of the Fleury is a Languedocian familly, with obscure precise origins. In the Spainish archives, it is mentioned that a Fleury, was a commander of the Order of the Temple at Carcassonne, at the beginning of the 14th century'. This Fleury family which is listed in the ' L’Armorial de Languedoc' has Paul-François-Vincent's grandmother as Marguerite de Rosset. She was the daughter of Bernardin de Rosset and Marie de Fleury, the sister of Cardinal Fleury. So although the two Fleury families have different origins, there was a union between them by marriage. Paul-François-Vincent was thus indeed the great-grandnephew of Cardinal Fleury - not via his Grandfather Fleury, but rather through his Grandmother Rosset!
The M. de Fleury mentioned by Auguste de Labouïsse-Rochefort who was the then Lord of the villages of Montferrand, Bains, Rennes, as well as the ruins of Blanchefort, at the time of his Devil Treasure story certainly married one of the descendants of Henry and Blaise Hautpoul - and he faced the same issues of people searching and pillaging his lands as his antecedents did! Later, Paul Urbain de Fleury, son of Paul François Vincent Fleury and Gabrielle Hautpoul Blanchefort bought the castle at Rennes abandoned by her aunt Mary. He also, rather strangely, has two graves in the cemetery at Rennes-les-Bains.
Hautpoul and its origins
While i was looking at the members of the Hautpoul family and the history of their origins, i of course knew that their genealogy could be traced back to 930. The name is attested in Hautpoul's records from 930. In 960 Bernard Raymond Hautpoul's negotiates a peace treaty between the King of France and the principal lords of the Languedoc. In 1096, Pierre-Raymond Hautpoul goes on Crusade to Antioch, Palestine during the First Crusade. But it is in the twelfth century that Hautpouls fate is sealed. A dissenting Christian religion develops in the Languedoc: the Cathars. Hautpoul's, its lords, and its people, adhere to the Cathar faith. Considered a heresy by the omnipotence of the Catholic Church, the Cathars are condemned and persecuted practitioners. Thus, the "crusade against the Albigensians" is a major event in medieval Occitan. Hautpoul, which is one of the strongholds attacked by the troops of Simon de Montfort, underwent a very hard siege in 1212 & for several days the village is bombarded by a catapult, occupied and burned.
Associating the family of the early Hautpouls and the village of Hautpoul with the Albigensians throws up all sorts of suggestions regarding the 'affair at Rennes'. Why? Because some of the Cathar families can be traced back to Alanic families of the 4th and 5th century who were in the army of the Visigothic king Alaric I. These Alanic families also had access to the fabled treasure of Alaric and something called the Holy Grail. These motifs appear frequently in the affair of Rennes! The town of Hautpoul itself is said to have been created by a Visigothic king, Ataulph.
Since ancient times, Hautpoul has been an observatory and defensive outpost of the first order: the rocky outcrop allows watch over the valleys of Thore, of Arnette, the Linoubre and Arn. Control towards the Albigensian is required. There are no reliable text which mention Hautpoul before the tenth century but its strategic position could be operated successively by the Volscians, the Romans and the Visigoths. The Romans may have contributed to the formation of Hautpoul's name: the name " Altpol " is attested in the sixth century and becomes "Hautpoul" - the corruption of the Latin "altum podium" (high hill). An old legend tells that Hautpoul was founded by Athaulf, king of the Visigoths in 413 . Later, from the sixth to the eighth century's, the border of Visigothic Septimania probably stopped at the crest of the Black Mountains, south of Mazamet. After 533, during the reign of King Childebert I (4th son of Clovis ) Hautpoul was a Frankish area. There are clues, you can see, in Hautpoul's architecture where some strata in some of the walls replicate the same patterns used by the Romans (opus spicatum) found also in Visigothic architecture. It is assumed that the Visigoths of Septimania were able to extend their dominion to Hautpoul and that they raised its defenses in the seventh century.
Athaulf
Athaulf belongs to the noble family of the Balthes. According to Zosimus he was the brother of King Alaric whom he succeeded. Jordanes describes Athaulf as a remarkable man, both by the superiority of his mind and his beauty .
At the end of the year 410, after the sack of Rome (August, 410), the Visigoths are in the south of Italy; Alaric has plans to gain Roman Africa through Sicily. But he died at that time and was buried near Cosenza. Athaulf, who is elected leader of the Visigoths after the death of Alaric, waives the African project and takes the Visigoths back to northern Italy, then in 412, he travels into Gaul, where the Visigoths remove the usurpers Jovin and Sebastian in Provence and the Aquitaine (413).
Shortly after the 1 January 414, in Narbonne, Athaulf married with great pomp Galla Placidia, the daughter of Emperor Theodosius (379-395) and half-sister of the Western Roman emperor Honorius, who had been captured by the Visigoths in 410. According to Jordanes, he had already married her in Italy, Forlì (Forum Livii), perhaps by a Germanic procedure. The ceremony in Narbonne was a lavish and famous affair and eyewitnesses said that treasure from the Visigothic looted Treasure of Jerusalem was used in the banquet ceremony.
The Visigoths then under pressure from Constance, a general in the service of Honorius, go to Narbonne and they spend time in Spain and then move on to take Barcelona in December 414. In 414 or early 415, Galla Placidia has a son who is given the significant name of Theodosius (Theodosius). But he died in infancy, most likely murdered at the instigation of a noble Visigoth faction hostile to Athaulf, which would, according to them, desire to "restore the Roman Empire through Gothic force " and they place his son on the imperial throne.
In 415 Athaulf himself is murdered betrayed by one of his officers. According to the chronicle of the Visigoth kings (Chronica regum Wisigotthorum) Ataulphus reigned 6 years. The new king, Sigeric reigns just 7 days before being murdered also on behalf of the feuding Germans by supporters of Athaulf. The noble Wallia, also of the balthe family, is elected king. Wallia, king of the Visigoths (415 - 418), is the son of Modaharius, a noble Visigoth of high lineage who may also have been related to the sacred family of the Balthes, some sources say he is the brother of Athaulf. Wallia's wife was also a noble belonging to this prestigious family. He is the grandfather of Ricimer .
The Balthes (meaning bold ) are along with the Amali, the two major Gothic lineages. The Balthes gave the Visigoths several kings until Amalaric died in 531, and the latter's daughter, Goswinthe, became the wife of King Visigoth Athanagild, who reigned from 554 to 567. On the death of Athanagild she becomes the wife of King Leovigild, reigning jointly with his brother from 567 and one of 572 to his death in 586. The Burgundian Clotilde, who became a Frankish queen, is also related to the lineage. Clothilde married the Merovingian king Clovis.
Edward Gibbon in Chapter 30, footnote to page # 4 of his History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire wrote : "This illustrious line continued to expand in France, in the Gothic province of Septimania, or Languedoc, under the misnomer of Baux, and a branch of the family then moved into the kingdom of Naples . The lords of Baux, near Arles and with seventy-nine known places remained independent of the Counts of Provence".
Perhaps these legends of Hautpoul, the Visigoths and their lost treasure and associated ancient families are all interlinked? I am reminded of the announcement made at http://www.lemercuredegaillon.net/gaillon27/dossier_blancassalz.htm - who reported an ‘exclusive announcement’ to listeners of Jean-Claude Carton on the radio station IDFM98 (Radio Enghien) June 3rd.
"It seems a ‘secret site’ has been found directly linked to Saunière through the recent papers that have come to light including the Book of Tobit auction material. No place name has been announced on the radio and it has not been announced on the website. This is to protect the site from pillaging or destruction. A report has been submitted to Boistel, a notary in Gaillon, who recorded a deed to assert the right to the site. This file, called "Blancassalz" ensures that the site is now protected against any attack.
The authorities have been informed.
The site is said to have been first found by Abbé Berenger Saunière priest of Rennes-le-Château in 1891, following the discovery of certain documents in his church during restoration works. The contents of the original site indirectly linked to the origin of the sudden wealth of the priest Saunière. Namely (?the site) was commissioned and paid for by an organization (or a conglomerate of organizations) in order to restore and maintain the place in a filing sent secretly from generation to generation among the noble families of the area until the Revolution.
That is to say the lords of Rennes - the Hautpoul (Seyres Félines) de Bugarach, de Voisins, de Fleury - Blanchefort, de Montesquieu, de Joyeuse & de la Rochefoucauld. These families received this mission from the beginning of the fourteenth century. The sponsors were the Templars, the key secret stakeholders in 1307.
Saunière, having found the site through documents found in his church, made sure to hide again the Treasury by ‘moving’ it. He then designed/produced new encrypted documents, known as the "Small and Large Parchments"(i.e. the documents first made available by Plantard and Chérisey), which suggested a symbolic treasure hunt so that his discovery would not be completely lost after him.
The repository, made up of relics, archives, religious material of a Christian and/or Jewish variety, is to the credit of the Knights Templar. They found these in their archaeological research in the Holy Land, including the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Palestine, Egypt and Ethiopia and then brought them to France. For the moment no physical deposit has been found, no excavation has been undertaken. Everything will be done legally. The permits will be sought in due course".
The researchers concluded: As I have always maintained, it is unlikely that the deposit has remained in place. Assuming that Saunière had found the cache, he will have moved all its content elsewhere. There is probably nothing at this site now. If there is evidence that the cache has been emptied by Abbé Saunière, traces may remain, however, the obligation to protect the site against any attack and vandalism. The place is an archaeological site. The location of the new cache has been transcribed in the second coding inserted in the large parchment. It will not be revealed now".
Perhaps the Maraval document which cites a Reddis/Cellis stone and the "Pierre levée des Pontils" [that] looks to the cellars and attics of the king" suggests a king of the Visigoths and his treasure?