The church of Ste.
Madeleine at Rennes-le-Château was originally consecrated in the year 1059.
In those days it was never the principal church of
Rennes-le-château but was instead the private chapel of the château Hautpoul
which can still be seen in the village today. The principal church, that
used by the villagers, was located only a short distance away and not far
from the stone ramparts that surrounded the village. That church was
dedicated to St. Pierre aux liens. In the year 1380the
village was besieged by a small army of Catalan mercenaries. At the time the
defense of the village was in the hands of the Count of Voisins who somewhat
foolishly decided to use one of the towers of the ramparts as the powder
magazine. The Catalans were apparently aware of this fact and
targeted the tower with their own cannon that resulted in the tower, outer
wall and most of the church being destroyed. It seems clear the mercenaries
were also forearmed with specific knowledge about the church because upon
gaining entry to the village they made no attempt to attack or take any
other part but instead made their way directly to the church. Within the
church was a deep pit leading to underground chambers and, according to
their information a treasure of immense value lay within. The captain of the
mercenaries instructed his men to remove the large stone guarding the
entrance and as his men made their way in to the underground maze, a huge
trapped stone fell upon them killing no less than 15 of their number. The
mercenaries described the opening as being bottomless and on seeing the
impossibility of gaining access to the underground chamber left the village
without a shot being fired. The underground cistern and chambers in
subsequent years were used as a refuse tip for vine pressings and despite
efforts to empty the chamber even after vast quantities of rubbish had been
removed the end was still nowhere in sight. It seems clear that the
quantities of in fill are of such magnitude that it would take an industrial
system to get to the bottom. It is interesting to note that the church we
know today was until about the 14th century dedicated to Ste. Marie. It was
only sometime after the 14th century that it changed to Ste. Marie
Madeleine.
Why would Saunière renovate a crumbling
church rather than having a brand new one built? In my opinion It was for
its history. He recognized
a precious piece of
history which he felt was well worth preserving.
The
exterior of the building is fairly unprepossessing and
is typical of so many of the other village churches
to be found in this region.
Beyond the ornately embellished doorway
however, lie many secrets. Secrets
that may have been extracted from the
now famous parchments found under the old altar of
the
church when the Abbé Bérenger Saunière first arrived in
Rennes-le-Château over a hundred years ago. From about
1886 onwards, Saunière embarked on a monumental refurbishment
of the church. Absolutely no expense was spared and it was not a project
that was hurried. From start to finish it took 11
years at a cost which some commentators put as high as 3.5 Million francs.
I add the following note in this regard:-
N.B.
Readers
should note that there is considerable controversy surrounding the actual sums of
money spent on the church and in truth I would be inclined to admit that
some authors have embellished the amount in order to enhance the mystique
surrounding the mystery. Mr. Jacques Rivière in his book Le Fabuleux
Trèsor de Rennes-le-Château, has carried out a meticulous survey of Saunière's
accounts based on actual invoices and arrives at a total estimated figure
of around 27,500 Francs for expenses relating solely to the church.
It must also be remembered that these invoices are
incomplete and that there are other elements
that have not been included in this
total such as the repairs to the roof, the excavation of the aisle, etc.
However even including these and a good deal of generous inflation,
the amount still falls far short from the huge sum of
3.5 million proposed by some. It is also worth bearing in mind that we do not have all
the details regarding his expenses and this, in the end,
could well increase the
total, possibly by a significant amount. So although it might be
difficult to arrive at 3.5 million, we should also not be too hasty is
making judgments about the actual final sum.
In the
same context, it has also been suggested by some authors that Saunière only received a small income
during these early years and that he was at pains to pay off all the debts he incurred.
Indeed actual records of the time show that many invoices were paid off in
stages over a somewhat lengthy period while others were deferred for considerably
longer. However we must not overlook the fact
that Saunière's friend, Henri
Boudet, gave to Saunière's housekeeper, Marie Denarnaud, the sum of 3,679,431
Francs between the years 1885 and 1891. This means Saunière had ample
funds to meet all his liabilities. Also, records of his lavish lifestyle
during these years leave us in no doubt whatsoever
that he was indulging himself in all the
extravagances associated with someone of considerable means. His death was
attributed officially as being due to a stroke but there is excellent
circumstantial evidence to assume it may have been due to cirrhosis of the liver brought about by his
prolific consumption of wines and spirits.
As a
modern day comparison of Saunière's expenditure, I ask you to recall that Saunière
was provided with an estimate to build a brand new church.
The estimate was
4,500 francs. Assuming he spent 27,500Fr this would suggest he could have
had 6 brand new churches built for the same amount. I am not familiar with
modern day building costs but it seems reasonable to imagine that a country
parish church might cost somewhere in the order of £500,000 or more to
build and furnish. You will agree that this sum is
nevertheless a
significant expense.
A view of
the cemetery
Saunière
also did not resort to using the first
craftsmen he could lay his hands on. He scoured the country for the very best. It was as though this
was to be his personal masterpiece. In rebuilding the church he injected an enormous
amount of effort to include elements which we believe may
refer to the parchments although it is equally
possible this information was derived from elsewhere. Many elements are subtle while others hit you in
the face with their directness. It also seems
clear from the content of his work that one way or another he was determined to pass
on some message to the rest of the world. It is at this
point that we must not loose track of the fact that his friend Henri Boudet
was undoubtedly involved in this project from its inception. We have little
evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, to suggest Boudet played a key role in the
project but since he and Saunière were to all intents and purposes
inseparable in those early days, I think it is a fair assumption to
say he must have played at least an advisory role. If this supposition is
correct then it is quite reasonable to also assume that much of what see
today was not actually the brainchild of Saunière himself. As you will see
later I have managed to extract considerable information from the church as
well as from other places that points conclusively to the hand of Boudet.
One's
initial impression on seeing the interior of the church is that it is a
hodgepodge of garish images and outlandish art almost randomly thrown
together. Yet this odd mixture of ecclesiastical art and
bizarre imagery took years to complete and cost a small fortune in today's
money. We know from evidence of the day that Saunière was excruciatingly
meticulous about the details and this in itself seems to suggest a
considerable effort was expended on the message that was supposed to
be passed on. If you add the element of Boudet also and you happen to be
familiar with his particular brand of literature, you may then begin to
realize the we are indeed dealing with a great deal more than meets the eye.
The Doorway
As you approach the
church down the narrow lane,
the doorway soon announces itself. A small roof protects the ornate carvings that stand
above the door. The entire triangular section above the
stone lintel above the door arch was commissioned by Saunière. The passage
of time has not been kind to the structure but nevertheless we can still see
much of what was originally designed.
At the very apex is a
ribbon-like motif draped over the cross. It bears the inscription 'In Hoc Signo Vinces' and a close
translation in French is inscribed within the church at the foot of a statuary group just
behind the devil. It reads "Par ce signe tu le vaincras", "By this sign you will
overcome him" or it could mean "By this sign you will win
it". Win what one wonders?
The Latin text incidentally translates as, "Under this sign you
win" but since Latin was also used to express broader ideas it can also
mean "You always win", or "You are the absolute winner".
Historically we know that these words
are derived from Constantine the Great (AD 274-337), founder of Constantinople (present day Istanbul)
and who was
the first Roman ruler to be converted to Christianity. In the year 312AD he was on the eve
of the battle of Milvian Bridge against his rival Maxentius when he apparently dreamt that Christ appeared to
him and instructed him to write the first two letters of his name (CR - the
Chai-Rho) on all the shields of
his soldiers. On the following day Constantine saw a cross superimposed on the sun along
with the words "In Hoc Signo Vinces". The outcome of the battle was that
Constantine defeated Maxentius.
The next object to be encountered on the
doorway is the statue. The plaque just below would seem to indicate that it is a
representation of St. Mary Magdalene. She holds a cross, which from due North points in a
direction of approximately 140 degrees (ie towards the SE). On either side of the statue are plants in containers.
Just below the statue is a long recessed
box in which has been inscribed:-
|
Regnum mundi et omnem ornatum soeculi
contempsi propter anorem domini mei Jesu Christi quem vidi quen amavi in quem cremini quem
dilexi. |
Since this
section of text contains a great many interesting pieces of information I
decided that it might be more appropriate to dedicate a small page
specifically to it. Please click on the button to view the page:-
Next in the sequence of inscriptions is
a central stone resembling a key stone supporting the main arch. Across it are
written the words:-
|
Terribilis Est Locus Iste
|
This place is
terrible, or frightful or dreadful. Why
would anyone write such an inscription
at the entrance to a church?
The
inscription is composed of 22 letters and as you will be aware from previous
sections, the number 22 occurs time and time again. For example there are
22 letters in the inscription "Par ce signe tu le vaincras". 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet, 22
steps leading up to the Magdala Tower. 22 crenellations
on the tower, 22 letters along the
top and bottom of Saunière's scribbled message "Sot pêcheur à l'embouchure du
Rhone...". It is quite obvious that the number 22 held some special
significance for Saunière and it should be placed carefully in our memories
for later use. I will also give you a tantalizing hint
that the half of this number will also play an exceptionally prominent role
as you will discover later.
Beginning on the left of the above
inscription and then continuing on the right of it is the following:-
|
Domus Mea Domus - - -
Orationis Vocabitur |
This translates as "My house will
be called a house of prayer"
In the same way that the contents of the
two known parchments were derived from the gospels, here too this is a direct link to the
gospels. The text appears in each of the following gospels:-
Matthew 21:13
|
Et dicit
eis: Scriptum est:
Domus mea domus orationis vocabitur: Vos autem illam speluncam latronum. |
Marc 11:17
|
Et docebat dicens
eis: None
scriptum est: Quia domus mea, domus orationis vocabitur omnibus Gentibus? Vos autem
fecistis eam speluncam latronum. |
Luke 19:46
|
Dicens
illis: Scriptum est:
Quia domus mea domus orationis est. Vos autem fecistis illam speluncam
latronum. |
John 2:16
|
Et his, qui columbas
vendebant dixit: auferte ista hinc, et nolite facere domum patris mea domum
negotiationis. |
In the first three gospels
each one ends with the words "You have turned it into a den of thieves".
However the word "spelunca, -ae, can also denote a cave and caves are indeed an
important part of this mystery since the region is peppered with them. Also of interest is
the first of these gospels, Matthew 21:13. If you recall parchment 1, it was taken from
Matthew 12:1. Look at the similarity in numbers 21:13, 12:1. Reverse either one and you
are close to the same numbers. The use of numbers also figures prominently in many of the
coded messages.
The next section of the
doorway carries another inscription, also divided into two:-
|
Hic domus dei est - - - et
porta |
As it stands the message is
only partly complete. It reads "This house is the house of God - - - and
door"
Porta on its own means a
city gate, a gate or a door. It could also be part of the verb Porto -are, to carry, to
convey, to bring. In either case there is a final word or words missing which makes it
impossible to read. Perhaps he was about to say "This house is the house of god and this is
his door" or something along those lines. As with some of the other
inscriptions, this too is not directly taken from the bible but formed from
bits cobbled together.
The true
biblical reference for this section was kindly provided by a reader who
wrote in. The section appears in Genesis 28:17
|
Pavensque,
quam
terribilis est
inquit
locus iste
non
est hic aliud
nisi
domus dei et porta
coeli. |
As you can
see from the text the first part, "Terribilis est locust iste",
is also taken directly from this section and even the word order has been
preserved. The second part "Hic domus dei est - - - et
porta" is again almost exactly what appears in this section of Genesis, the
only difference being the positioning of the word Est. The fact that
the section has also been derived from Genesis is an excellent
indication that it is the correct biblical reference. To understand
why I say this you will need to read my "Unification Theory" which
appears in the pages covering the works of Henri Boudet. He uses Genesis as
the basis of much that appears within his book La Vraie Langue Celtique.
To the right of the doorway, and sadly no longer visible is the coat of arms of Mgr Leuillieux
bishop of
Carcassonne
between the years
1873 et 1881.
The raised sculpture that
stands just below the inscription "Terribilis est locus iste" represents the
coat of arms of Pope Leon 13th. Just below the carving are the words "Lumen in
Coelo" which translated means "light in the sky" or perhaps
if you choose to use the
language of Boudet, Skylight.
On the left of the doorway is a further coat of
arms belonging to Arsène Billard who was also a bishop of Carcassonne and
seemed to hold Saunière in quite some degree of affection.
These coats of arms on a
church door are quite extraordinary and are seldom if ever seen. Since this
requires a good deal more explanation I have made a separate page that
examines them in slightly more detail.
Inside the Church - The
Devil
The doorway we see today is not the
original one. In the 11th Century when the church had just been built as the
private chapel to the Chateau of Hautpoul which can still be seen in the
village of Rennes-le-château the doorway was situated in exactly the
position where the present day confessional stands. What we see today
was a later addition and was used for funerary rights, that is to say to bring the dead in to
the church. It was also known as "La porte des
morts" through which the souls of the departed would leave the church.
In fact we can be fairly precise about when this door was added and the old
one closed, since the presbytery that adjoins the church was built in 1725
and the original builder's plaque can still be seen on the outside wall:
In this next photograph you
can see the doorway as it is today. Note in particular the way in which the
entrance has been cut in to the stonework. It is not central. Had the door
been constructed in this place as part of the original church it would have
been centralized exactly. Originally there would probably have been either a niche
or perhaps a much smaller door leading to the outside.
The very instant you pass through
the door you are greeted by a hideous devil on your left.
He is not made from wood but is made from the same terracotta as are all the
other statues.
What is so striking about
this model is the incredible posture of the subject. He is neither kneeling nor standing
nor squatting. To me it looks rather like he is about to stand up or has perhaps slipped
on something and landed in this awkward position. His left hand seems to have pulled back his robe
to reveal his right knee and part of his thigh. His right hand is formed into an
exceptionally strange gesture as though signifying the letter O or something round.
In today's world the sign might be taken for "Perfect" or "OK".
In fact it quite innocuous and represents nothing more sinister or cryptic than the position
used to hold a trident. This was originally part of the devil's
accoutrements and was at some later date removed. The devil is also
grimacing hideously. It is a look of great pain or discomfort, no doubt in
part due to his uncomfortable position. In fact if any of you would care to try kneeling
in this position you will soon find that it is indeed very uncomfortable. His robe
is quite fine and looks not unlike a green silk.
It
must be mentioned that originally his robe was a rich blue. however copper
in the pigment has subsequently reverted to a pale green. The blue sky in
most of the stations of the cross has also become green. At his waist he wears a gold band. As can be seen in this
photograph the devil is actually
supporting the font on his shoulders.
Interestingly the font has been created in such a way as to resemble a giant oyster shell.
In French the word for oyster is "Huitre". Is Saunière trying to make a
reference to the number eight "Huit". The colloquial meaning of
Huitre is a "fool".
Some say that he is sitting on a small,
unseen chair which alludes to a landmark called "Le fauteuil du diable"
which actually, is not far from the "Source du Cercle". There are many
theories all to do with some anatomical feature of the devil but none have actually been
shown to be of any consequence. As mentioned in many parts of my text, unless you have
some hard evidence to back up a theory it really doesn't count for much.
The mark of the devil
As if the
devil and the other statuary groups above him were not enough to stimulate
our interest, there is yet another fascinating item to be discovered in
connection with this statue. On his right wing can be seen 5 marks.
Those who have
studied these marks are divided in to two camps, that they are letters in
some obscure script or, like me, that they represent the numeral 1 repeated
five times. In any event it does seem to be an
inescapable fact that they are present and in addition that they were placed
there quite deliberately by Saunière. Remember that his instructions to the
craftsmen who made this ensemble were exceedingly precise. It is hard for
us to believe therefore the possibility that these marks are either random
or meaningless. I explain more on the possible significance of these numbers
in later pages concerning the church. Detailed
discussion here..
The Angels
Slightly to the rear, above and to
the right of the devil can be seen a statuary group of four
angels. In point of fact the angels cannot be taken in
isolation since they form a single intimate group that comprises the devil,
the font in the form of a shell, the inscription, the initial BS, the angels
and finally a Celtic cross above the entire ensemble. The entire piece was
commissioned as a single object. In this next photo you can see the entire
piece:
The following
photo shows the group of angels:
Each angel is in the
process of carrying out one of the movements required to make the sign of the cross. The
only exceptions perhaps are the topmost angel and the one kneeling who give the
distinct impression of trying to
see in to the distance as well as the impression of pointing to something below.
At the foot of the group is the inscription "Par ce signe tu
le vaincras".
Just
below the inscription is a small circular plaque in which are written the letters
BS. Below the plaque can be seen two Salamanders, their tails supporting a
ring set on top of a pine cone. flames appear to be rising all around
them.
Since this small plaque forms a distinct and rather interesting aspect I
have provided a special section devoted to it. Click on the button below to
view it.
Given the proximity to the devil, the immediate inference is that
this inscription refers to him, i.e. "By this sign you will defeat him,
the devil". Again what is
interesting here is that this line of text is 22 characters long. Had
Saunière adhered to the true Latin text "In hoc
signo vinces" he would have been left with 20 letters. Instead of which
he added "le" which of course makes up 22 letters and additionally
introduces considerable ambiguity into the meaning of the entire sentence.
The Gold
Band
As you can see in the photograph of the
devil he wears a gold band around his waist. In appearance it looks more like a solid gold
ring rather than a belt made of leather or cloth. There is a chance that this could be an
allusion to one of the Carolingian kings namely Jean XI whose ancestry goes back to
Sigebert IV. The coat of arms of Jean XI shows the upper part of a suit of armour sitting
atop a vertically striped field in the centre of which is a gold fleur de Lys encircled by
a gold band. The motto is "Et in arcadia ego".
The Celtic
Cross
The entire
statuary group consists of (from the ground up), The devil, the oyster shell
stoop, the BS monogram, the four angels and motto and the whole finally
surmounted by a Celtic cross.
It all forms
part of a single major terracotta statuary group and is by far the most
complicated and detailed within the entire church save perhaps for the altar.
Saunière's use of the Celtic cross is a little unusual and indeed he
also uses the
Celtic cross to surmount the confessional. There are
therefore two at least in the church. In this instance they are almost side by
side, certainly not more than a couple of meters apart and also at about the
same height above ground.
