The Secret Dossiers contain a wealth of disparate information. At first glance there does not seem to be a coherent picture to be discerned. And perhaps that is the point. We can surmise from the poem Le Serpent Rouge (henceforth LSR) that the information relates to a tomb and what is more it is a tomb of some importance. We know the author is searching for this tomb. And we know that the action takes place around Rennes-le-Château. Somehow it is all tied up with Mary Magdalene.
If we study the rest of the Lobineau Documents in relation to LSR it can hardly be said that these feature a tomb of importance and a search for it. Or does it? How does it all fit together? Do the common themes and motifs in the Dossiers connect with LSR?
These Secret Dossier pages feature:
· The foundation of the abbey and church of Saint Germaine des Pres.
· Various Merovingian monarchs and burials associated with this abbey and church.
· Maps of this royal abbey as well as land ownership in the vicinity ruled by the Merovingian monarchs.
· Photos of the abbey and church and ground plan of Saint Sulpice in Paris.
· Photos of the tombs of certain Merovingians
· An extract from ‘Le Bi-centaire de Mazarin 1861 showing the inscription of the Gnomon at Saint Sulpice
· Genealogies of certain Merovingian families
· Floor plan of Saint Sulpice marking a Meridian (marked PS—PRAE CUM) and a reference to the 7th station of the Cross in the Chapel of the Angels (i.e. the Delacroix Chapel).
· An aerial view of the Left Bank area of Paris, Faubourg Saint Germain, in 1615, which also hints at a Meridian. (Which Meridian? The official Paris Meridian was fixed only in 1667).
As you can see the most important points raised are those of Saint Germaine des Pres, Saint Sulpice, the Merovingians and Meridians. What are these ideas to do with Rennes-le-Château, and a search for a tomb and Mary Magdalene? Is it all deliberate obfuscation or are we to indeed ‘..be careful not to add or remove one iota... ’ and think, think again?
From the Google maps it is obvious Rue Lobineau, as a central road linking all the sites of interest in the Secret Dossiers, was picked to entitle this strange collection of documents and information.
A descendant of Clovis through Dagobert II
The opening page of the Secret Dossiers shows a blazon of the ‘House of Plantard’. It is described as a ‘Circle and golden fleur de Lys’. Looking over the blazon is a ‘knight’ in his armour and hanging from his neck is a ‘Star of David’ chain, a hexagram if you will. Are we to detect a hint of Jewish interest in the story? As you will see later this is indeed the case. Extract of the cover page of the Secret Dossiers
Underneath is the motto ‘ET IN ARCADIA EGO ...’ The motto itself is suggested to have originated in the XIIth century.
The whole Secret Dossiers file is dedicated to ‘Monseignour, le Comte de Rhédae, Duc du Razès, le lègitime descendant de Clovis I, Roi des Francs .... Rejeton ardent du ‘Roi’ et Saint Dagobert II’. Signed by Philippe Toscan du Plantier he describes himself as ‘the humble servant’ of this legitimate descendant presenting to him the ‘Secret Dossiers’ of Henri Lobineau.
And who is Henri Lobineau? Apparently Leo Schidlof (but elsewhere previously identified as Count de Lenoncourt) a ’remarkable genealogist’. Had Schidlof, through his study of genealogy, discovered a descendant of the Merovingian murdered king Dagobert II? Du Plantier says that the Rennes-le-Château affair has a wider meaning: ‘that is to say the affair of the Languedoc, has as its motive, viticulture’. The affair of Rennes is to do with wine growing? I hardly think so. So what can be meant here? Viticulture (from the Latin word for vine) is the science, production and study of grapes which deals with the series of events that occur in the vineyard. The kind of viticulture advocated by du Plantier however has nothing to do with wine growing in the Languedoc but everything to do with a bloodline. But which bloodline? Below we will quite clearly see that the bloodline is from the Line of Solomon.
'There seems to be a kind of law in Scripture that the first reference to any subject which thereafter receives particular attention has special importance. As we shall see, this is signally true of two trees, the fig and the olive. I'm not certain whether this is so of the vine. The first mention (of the Vine) is found in Genesis 9:20, where Noah planted a vineyard. It was his undoing: it led, in fact, to the only lapse in what seems otherwise to have been a life of great piety. This particular incident seems to throw little light on the symbolic use of the vine. However, when Israel came out of Egypt at the time of the Exodus, they were welded together in a unique way under recognized leadership so that the event marked in the strictest sense the Birth of a Nation. In Psalm 80:8-19 a summary history of Israel is given which opens with the words, "Thou hast brought a vine out of Egypt: Thou hast cast out the heathen, and planted it. Thou preparedst room before it, and didst cause it to take deep root, and it filled the land." The record goes on to describe how this vine spread across the country from Jordan to the Mediterranean. And then it was forsaken by the husbandman who planted it, and it perished.......’ And furthermore ’.....if there is the kind of consistency in Scripture which I am arguing for here, I think the Lord referred to Himself as the True Vine because He was in the strictest possible sense the true King of Israel and their mainstream nationally. When they rejected Him, they committed national suicide. Their ideas of what their nationhood really meant, what the special favour they had enjoyed at God's hand signified, were so far from the truth, so this-worldly, so unspiritual, that they failed entirely to recognize who Jesus really was.’ (http://www.custance.org/old/time/2ch2.html).
The grape vine is also a symbol of Israel and a symbol of blessing and fertility. "Israel will grow as the vine" (Hosea 14:8) and "Thy wife shall be as a fruitful vine" (Psalm 128:3). Later, in the Talmud, the symbol grew larger and the vine became the world or Jerusalem. So does the Rennes Affair and the Languedoc have at its heart viticulture because it harbours an important Jewish descendant of the line of Solomon? This would appear to be what Lobineau intended. The Languedoc, in the Secret Dossiers, is described as the ‘home of legends, land of the French annexation by Queen Blanche of Castile and the Inquisition .. And yet even in our times we speak of the legend of a prince who will issue from a long dormant stock, coming from the Languedoc to conquer France’.
‘The Languedoc itself is a former province of France, now continued in the modern-day régions of Languedoc-Roussillon and the Midi-Pyrénées in the south of France, and whose capital city was Toulouse. The region was called the county of Toulouse, a county independent from the kings of France. The Languedoc was also made up of the area of Rousillon. This region formed part of the Roman province of Gallia Narbonensis from 121 BC to AD 462, when it was ceded with the rest of Septimania to the Visigoth Theodoric II. His successor, Amalaric, on his defeat by Clovis in 531 retired to Hispania, leaving a governor in Septimania. Septimania was a march of the Carolingian Empire and then West Francia down to the thirteenth century, though it was culturally and politically separate from northern France and the central royal government. The region was under the influence of the Toulousain, Provence, and Catalonia. It was part of the cultural and linguistic region named Occitania that was finally brought within the control of the French kings in the early 13th century as a result of the Albigensian Crusade after which it came under French governors’. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languedoc)
According to du Plantier the legends and tribulations of the Languedoc area relate to this ‘hidden prince’ who will conquer France and somehow this is why Blanche of Castile coveted the area and why via the Crusades kings and popes sought to control this area. Why the interest? Is this ‘hidden prince’ a real person or somehow metaphorical indicating something else? This same hidden prince Lobineau continues ‘... will spring from the line of Solomon who will draw up his immense treasure of gold and silver ......’ and which constitutes a folklore tale that the religious authority had ‘understood very well when the Bishop of Carcassonne recalled the unusual life of Bérenger Saunière’.
So Rennes-le-Château and Saunière are somehow linked to this ‘prince’ from a dormant line of Solomon (i.e. we are dealing with Jewish descent here of the line of King David). The suggestion that this prince will draw up his gold and silver may be a reference to the Temple treasure of Solomon looted by the Visigoth King Alaric from Rome in 410AD and said to rest somewhere in the Languedoc.
What did Abbé Saunière know asks du Plantier? He had indispensable knowledge. The same knowledge that was also held by Henri Boudet & revealed by RP Vannier. Knowledge that Emile Hoffet had confided to Leo Shidlof!
The Secret Dossiers then move on to speak of the parchments that Saunière found. These are the often cited genealogies of the descendants of Dagobert II (from 681—1244). 1244 is the year of the Fall of Montsegur, a château which was a bastion of Languedocian independence and somehow tied up with Blanche of Castile and according to du Plantier related to the Inquisition and this ‘prince’.
There is also a testament of François - Pierre d’Hautpoul, lord of Rennes and Bezu comprising further genealogies from 1200— 1644 which were registered 23rd November 1644 by Captier, a notary at Esperaza. Two further parchments, extracts from two Gospels, whose dates are 1781—1791 were coded by Antoine Bigou, the last cure of Rennes-le-Château.
Du Plantier speaks of the famous Saint Vincent de Paul and his journey from Toulouse to Marseille in 1605 . He says this was related to the above Languedocian events and that there is a connection with Robert Fludd. The intimation here is that Vincent de Paul knew Fludd. François Pierre d’Hautpoul according to du Plantier was also involved with Saint Vincent de Paul. Du Plantier ends this section with a rather curious statement: ‘Those who contemplate the strange painting of Valasquez’ ‘Crucifixion’ find an object for meditation’ Du Plantier says a rather curious statement: ‘Those who contemplate the strange painting of Valasquez’ ‘Crucifixion’ find an object for meditation’. A similarity to the SIGNOL painting?
The main theme thus far is that the Rennes affair concerns a bloodline, a descendant of Solomon, ‘a great prince’ who will come from the Languedoc and gather up the silver and gold there which is his rightful treasure by inheritance. This does seem rather odd though. The bloodline descendants of Dagobert II having been referenced at the beginning of the whole of the Secret Dossiers document is the only ’bloodline’ to have been mentioned or hinted at. But Dagobert II was not Jewish he was Merovingian! He also had no descendants that are confirmed to have survived historically.
The Dossiers move on to depict an early engraving of the abbey of Saint Germaine des Pres. The text refers to the small territory or land this church was built on. A very bizarre paragraph, a strange extract, written by one Alex Lenoir appears. It says: ‘"on the right of the cadaver, a wooden cane was discovered that is believed to be made of hazel-wood, more or less 6 feet in length, and topped by a little ivory transversal piece forming a resemblance to a crutch, carved "a jour" (meaning with deep reliefs and "see through") and possibly dating from the eight or ninth century. This sort of tau was affixed to the wood by means of a similarly worked copper base." (Translation courtesy ‘Roger’)
Why this paragraph appears is not explained. But the authors are clearly referring us to an object or artefact found in a tomb. But whose tomb? Which corpse? A Merovingian corpse? This would appear so as we are in a Merovingian necropolis. Next is a diagram of the ‘royal abbey’ of Saint Germaine des Pres. It was supposedly designed by Gaston de Koker but is taken from ‘Paris à Travers les Ages’ by F. Hoffbauer (1886). On it is the first hint of the importance of Meridians. Above: Regalis abatia germane a pratis topographia—The Meridius is marked for us very clearly (I have completed the line here that you are obviously supposed to connect!) Th. Garnier (in his ‘Le Mercure de Gaillon’) in an article called ‘The Seven Keys of the Serpent Rouge, or the reconstituted puzzle’ identified the Hoffbauer source for elements found in the Secret Dossiers. At the Gallica.bnf.fr website images from this source publication appear. The plan of Saint Germaine des Pres which appears on page 7 of LSR is shown below.
Plantard and/or Chérisey have added the Meridian.
Other images from Hoffbauers jaunt through Paris, utilised in the Lobineau Documents.
The text continues: 'on the left bank of the Seine ..were the gardens of the church where stood a temple of Isis. Lucotitius .....and its surrounding plains which extended far away, where there were beautiful roads - lengthened, which were directed towards Grenlie, Sevres and towards Vaugirard. Under the first Merovingian kings this territory remained about the same. However the Roman camp disappeared and on the ruins of the temple of Diana Clovis builds the basilica of Saint Pierre and Saint Paul which later is called the Holy Genevieve. The palace of the Thermal Baths became the residence of the chiefs of the Francs, successors of Caesars. Childebert and especially his wife Ultrogothe seem to have had much affection for this residence and its splendid gardens and they took pleasure in cultivating fruit trees and plants by their own hands. Saint Germain, bishop of Paris, however, decided that a section of these gardens should be separated and towards 550 the basilica of Saint Vincent and the Holy Cross, founded by Childebert, was raised at the angle of the gardens of the palace of the Thermal baths on the site that had been occupied by the temple of Isis. The desire to please Saint Germain, Gregoire de Tours reported that the inhabitants of Saragossa when under siege by Childebert in 542 resorted to a singular act for their defence. They were covered in sack cloth and circled the city several times carrying holy relics singing canticles and while carrying in front of them the tunic of Saint Vincent. Childebert, enthralled by this display, entered into talks with Aimoin & obtained the invaluable tunic for the price of his army, with which they went on the ravage another part of Spain. The new temple Childebert later built was intended to shelter the sacred relic and was dedicated to Vincent: it also had the name of Holy Cross in remembering a cross of gold that Childebert obtained and which he thought had belonged to King Solomon’.
In the Lobineau documents there are pictures of the facade of the church of Saint Germaine des Pres by M. A Lenoir followed by diagrams of Poussin, St Vincent de Paul and Delacroix. Why? Are they related to this gold cross artefact or some other relic? Is this why the Solomonic Temple treasure is evoked earlier in the documents? On the following page our story continues: ‘the holy bishop, who dedicated [the church] in 558 and established a religious community under the direction of Droctovee ....the first abbé - died in 570 and was buried in Saint Symphorien’. This text again seems to refer to Saint Germain. At the bottom of the page the text continues ‘Gislemar, a chronicler of the 11th century, wrote an enthusiastic description of the basilica: ...’Il nous parait inutile, ecrit-il, de depeindre le marveilleux travial de ce temple, l’habile agencement de ses fenetres, les marbres ....qui les soutenaient, la disposition des lambris dores don't la voute etait charge, la splendour des murailles, qui, comme il convient a la maison du Christ, etaient revetues d’une brilliance couleur d’or, et la beaute du pavement orne de mosaiques. Le toit recouvert de bronze partfaiement dore, ett reflechissant ainsi les rayons du soleil, etincelait de telle sorte qu’il eblouissait les regardes par son éclat oncessif. De la est adveunn que jadis le vulgaire par ...’
In other words this church and abbey of Saint Germaine des Pres was a splendour to behold, a fitting house of Christ ...in laid with gold everywhere and made with the finest craftsmanship of the time. There follow diagrams of Merovingian tombs found at Saint Denis, that of Childebert and Chilperic I and the stone tomb of Fredegonde. There is a depiction of an unidentified tomb discovered at Saint Germaine in 1709. Perhaps there is a link with this tomb and the wooden cane found by a Merovingian cadaver mentioned above? The Gnomen at Saint Sulpice, as well as a Cross Fourchee (a forked cross in heraldry) are depicted. Next is a ground plan of Saint Sulpice. A Meridian is marked .... PRAE-CUM & MΩ (but with the omega Ω is on its side very much reading like MC). Also of importance to the author are the Signol paintings in this diagram (numbered 1,2,3 & 4), the Delacroix chapel (numbered 5) and the Chapel of Saint Martin where the left hand side of the chapel is numbered 6. It would appear that a painting here is important. These themes are discussed elsewhere in other writings of Chérisey. The Chapel of Saint Martin at Saint Sulpice. In the Secret Dossiers map of Saint Sulpice this chapel is numbered 6. It is the ‘legend’ of Saint Martin and the beggar and here Martin cuts his cloak in half to give to the naked beggar.
One of the Signol paintings identified by Chérisey - that of the Crucifixion.
There follows a small paragraph signed by S. Sulpice: ‘the four statues ....that are the first pillars of the choir, the four ‘tribune dorées’, the magnificent balustrades of marble .. .of the sanctuary, and other parts of this church merit our attention’. We seem to be now in Saint Sulpice church.
Pierre Fugere writes about Signol using this glyph pictured to the left. He writes: ‘Signol name, and in 751, the body of a ‘prelate’ buried in a circle of stones, was transferred to the ‘oriental portico’ of the basilica, behind the altar of the Sainte Croix (Holy Cross)’. I think we may need to read this paragraph in isolation, so perhaps we have to ask what Signol has to do with the burial of a prelate in a ‘circle of stones’? ◦ Fugere continues: ‘Childebert and Ultrogothe rested there already. It was the same for their successors Charibert, Chilperic, and Fredegonde, Clotaire II and Bertrude, Childeric II and Bilichilde etc… because the church of Saint Germaine was used as a place of burial of the Merovingians. Childebert had richly equipped the basilica. In addition to the immense stronghold of Iseire or Issy, which extended to the west of Paris (Meudon), it had the exclusive right of land up to the seine, and up to eighteen feet on each side of its banks, since the Petit-Pont Sevres has, with its vines, the oratory of Saint Andeol which replaced the church of Saint Andre of the arts etc’. Fugere has switched back to the Abbey of Saint Germaine des Pres after a brief mention of Saint Sulpice. There is a picture of the Mausoleum of Languet de Gergy (curé of Saint Sulpice). And next to this is a drawing of a statue of Childebert.
Statue of Childebert at the Louvre Museum, shown in the Secret Dossiers.
There follows five pages of genealogies, ending with the House Of Broyes (which includes Renaud III, a count of Chérisey, ancient lord of Vaudressel).
There is a necrology to De Cayron who is Abbé Emile Francois Cayron, the parish priest of St Laurent de la Cabrerisse in the Aude who had allegedly received a "Great Secret" orally from the Abbé Cauneille (who had received it directly from Antoine Bigou). Abbé Cauneille also passed the same ‘secret’ on to Abbé Jean Vié, parish priest of Rennes-les-Bains from 1840 to 1870. Abbé Henri Boudet who succeeded Jean Vié as the parish priest of Rennes-les- Bains was himself from a poor family in Quillan who was educated and formed by the same above mentioned Abbé Cayron. Were the priests of the two Rennes involved in something here? But what? ‘That a colossal and priceless treasure lay buried somewhere in the Razés, around Rennes-le-Château and Rennes-les-Bains, in twelve hidden places which had been indicated to the abbé Bigou by the Marquise de Blanchefort. The former had left a coded message, of which he had inserted "a key" in the epitaph of the Marquise. They also knew of the existence of documents which had an extraordinary historical importance. Two priests would later know how to take advantage of them....’ (The Visitors Guide to Rennes le Château by Wiel Vercoulen - http://www.esperazabedandbreakfast.com/Rennes-le-Chateau.html).
The Secret Dossiers continue with a rather bizarre extract on the ‘Heiron du Val D’Or’. This asserts that the Greeks were ignorant of the source of the knowledge contained in their mythology. In a veritable language exercise reminiscent of Boudet the extract suggests that through etymology one can see that the Greek language came through Hebrew and that somehow using the Hebrew language we can trace the source of the Greeks’ ancient knowledge! The extract also states that the Roman, Ceasar, had noted that the Druids used the Greek language …. therefore our author is trying to hint that Cesar is seeking to establish some sort of link between the Bronze Age cultures which migrated to the Mediterranean and the Druids as they both used Greek! Using the history of words and how their form and meaning have changed over time it is asserted that the Great Bear (and study of the constellation) somehow reflects the coming of Christ! Suddenly we are introduced to the ‘red flag’, a red flag which is related to the Sacred Heart. ‘Previously a red cloth had been thrown derisively on the shoulders of Jesus in front of Pilate, who then scoffed at his alleged office of King of the Jews. And in the Apocalypse, XIX, 13, it is covered in a red cloak that Christ returns in royal majesty. Red is indeed the crimson colour of the kings, this primitive race having given to the world its rules and its laws, because all the people of Europe living on the banks of the Atlantic Ocean can claim the priestly heritage’ This paragraph is interesting. It separates out Jesus as King of the Jews who has been anointed in the material sense and that of the Christ, the messiah who is the King of Israel from the Davidic line and who will rule the people of united tribes of Israel and herald the Messianic Age of global peace. Both are associated with a red cloak or banner.
The messianic concept is thought by some scholars to have been introduced during the age of the Old Testament prophets which was relatively late in the history of Judaism. Traditional scholars of Judaism disagree maintaining instead that the concept of the Messiah has always been a part of Judaism. The Christian concept of the Christ/Messiah as "the Word made Flesh" (see also Logos) is fundamentally different from the Jewish and Islamic in that the majority of historical and mainline Christian theologies, as seen within the Nicene Creed, consider Jesus to be God or God the Son. Christians believe that Daniel was a prophet and gave an indication of when the Messiah, the prince mashiyach nagiyd, would come. Daniel's prophecies refer to him as a descendant of King David, a Son of Man, who will rebuild the nation of Israel, destroy the wicked, and ultimately judge the whole world. In Christian theology, the Christ/Messiah serves four main functions and the two most important are that He suffers and dies to make atonement before God for the sins of all humanity, because His justice requires that sins be punished, according to Penal substitution theology. And He serves as the pioneer, embodiment of the culture and living presence of the kingdom of God. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah). In the Secret Dossiers, by bringing in Apocalypse 19, verse 13, the historical Jesus has become the Christ. Therefore perhaps it is the anointing that is the important theme? And it brings up the very early themes of the Languedoc and Rennes Affair as somehow being related to a Jewish prince, incognito, who will gather up his rightful treasure! This is the Jewish affair par excellence. It is Mathew’ Gospel which mentions a ’scarlet robe’, and which is the nearest to a red cloak.
“ Then the governor's soldiers took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole company of soldiers around him. They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him, and then twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on his head. They put a staff in his right hand and knelt in front of him and mocked him. "Hail, king of the Jews!" they said. They spit on him, and took the staff and struck him on the head again and again. After they had mocked him, they took off the robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him away to crucify him’.
The other Gospels use the following terminologies: Mark: The soldiers led Jesus away into the palace (that is, the Praetorium) and called together the whole company of soldiers. They put a purple robe on him, then twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on him. And they began to call out to him, "Hail, king of the Jews!"
Luke: Then Herod and his soldiers ridiculed and mocked him. Dressing him in an elegant robe, they sent him back to Pilate. That day Herod and Pilate became friends—before this they had been enemies. (Note that it is Herod here who gave Jesus a robe, but no colour is stipulated).
John: Then Pilate took Jesus and had him flogged. The soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head. They clothed him in a purple robe and went up to him again and again, saying, "Hail, king of the Jews!" And they struck him in the face.
Here the robe is coloured purple.
As for Christ returning in a red cloak—this is not quite correct. What it actually says in Chapter 19, Verse 13 of the Apocalyspe/Revelations is this: ‘He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.’ or perhaps: ‘And he is arrayed in a garment sprinkled with blood: and his name is called The Word of God’.
A commentary describes it thus: Christ, the glorious Head of the church, is described as on a white horse, the emblem of justice and holiness. He has many crowns, for he is King of kings, and Lord of lords. He is arrayed in a vesture dipped in his own blood, by which he purchased his power as Mediator; and in the blood of his enemies, over whom he always prevails. His name is The Word of God; a name none fully knows but himself; only this we know, that this Word was God manifest in the flesh. (http://bible.cc/revelation/19-13.htm) Interesting as all this may be to theologians what is it to do with our subject here in the Secret Dossiers? Somehow this cloak of Jesus has become a banner or flag and is supposed to correspond with the flag of the Sacred Heart. And what else? ‘Red is indeed the crimson colour of the kings, this primitive race having given to the world its rules and its laws, because all the people of Europe living on the banks of the Atlantic Ocean can claim the priestly heritage’. And who are the these primitive race of Kings? At least one travel site on the Internet describes the Merovingian’s as the first ‘primitive race’:
‘Without the walls, on the left bank of the Seine, extended a vast prairie, on the outskirts of which stood the ancient palace of the Caesars, adopted as a royal residence by the kings of the first race in France. This palace in the course of time, instead of commanding a Roman camp, became a sort of centre between the two first faubourgs of Paris, built both on the river, the one, Saint-Pierre (later Sainte-Genevieve), upon the rise of land where now stands the Pantheon, and the other, Saint-Vincent et Sainte-Croix, nearer the river (later Saint-Germain-des-Pres)’. http://www.oldandsold.com/articles08/paris-travel-8.shtml .
The Kings associated with these buildings and this land are the Merovingian Kings and Queens. This would make sense in the context of the current themes in the Dossiers. Red is the crimson colour of kings? Which kings? Scarlet (the colour used in Mark) is used by biblical writers to describe fine materials and thread. It was also used in Mosaic purification rituals. Scarlet, like crimson, is used to describe sin. And Scarlet can generally be used to symbolize a marker. Red in the scriptures are primarily associated with blood and war. The direct meanings of this colour in the Bible are as follows: skin colour - Genesis 25:25, clothing - Isaiah 63:2; shields of mighty men - Nahum 2:3; horses - Zechariah 1:8; 6:2 , the sky - Matthew 16:2-3, the great dragon (Satan) - Revelation 12:3 , war - II Kings 3:22; Nahum 2:3 vengeance - Isaiah 63:2. Scarlet, or Crimson in Isa. 1:18 is a Hebrew word which denotes the worm or grub whence a dye was procured. In Gen. 38:28,30, the word so rendered means “to shine,” and expresses the brilliancy of the colour. The small parasitic insects from which this dye was obtained somewhat resembled the cochineal which is found in Eastern countries. It is called by naturalists Coccus ilics. The dye was procured from the female grub alone. Scarlet robes were worn by the rich and luxurious (2 Sam. 1:24; Prov. 31:21; Jer. 4:30. Rev. 17:4). It was also the hue of the warrior's dress (Nah. 2:3; Isa. 9:5). The Phoenicians excelled in the art of dyeing this colour (2 Chr. 2:7). There is a link here in the next paragraph regarding the crimson colour in the Secret Dossiers. The writer says that the colour red is that of Hermes (and in brackets it then says Kermes). The dye for the scarlet or crimson colour was obtained by the Egyptians from the shell-fish Carthamus tinctorius; and by the Hebrews from the Coccus ilicis, an insect which infests oak trees, called kermes by the Arabians. This colour was very early known (Gen. 38:28). It was one of the colours of the ephod (Ex. 28:6), the girdle, and the breastplate of the high priest. It is also mentioned in various other connections (Josh. 2:18; 2 Sam. 1:24; Lam. 4:5; Nahum 2:3).
The Secret Dossiers article mentions Hermes, the Messenger of the Gods and the guide of the
Underworld. He was worshiped throughout Greece -- especially in Arcadia -- and festivals in his honour were called Hermoea. Perhaps in the colour symbolism we are to see the fact that a line of kings can be associated with the ‘holy priesthood’, as colours are associated with the ephod, girdle and breastplate of the high priest.¹ The dossiers also seem to be equating the scarlet robe thrown over Christ as the flag, the ’red standard’ called the ’vexillum’ or cantabrun which was used as the exclusive insignia of more ‘venerated Roman armies’ in the Roman Empire. This standard was carried at the head of the troops during battle and its guard was entrusted to ‘fifty’ Praetorians.
Chérisey describes the standard as consisting ‘of a crossed lance made from a stick, from which fell a crimson veil with fringes of gold. The pole was surmounted by an eagle made of gold’. It was this vexillum which was later adapted by Constantine after his famous vision of the monogram of Christ (and not the cross) in France and later called the Labarum.
So, had the cloak been kept and used in part with a standard carried by the Praetorian Guard? Chérisey equates the ‘more venerated armies’ as carrying the above standard and he says that the Emperor Constantine after his ‘famous vision’ instituted the Labarum (the monogram of Christ) in place of the Eagle standard of the Praetorian Guard. The Praetorian Guard were a force of bodyguards used by Roman Emperors. Before being appropriated for the use of the Emperors' personal guards the title was used for the guards of Roman generals at least since the rise to prominence of the Scipio family around 275 BC. The Guard was dissolved by Emperor Constantine I in the fourth century AD. The Praetorian guard must be seen as the more ‘venerated army’ by Chérisey as it served the Emperor as his own personal bodyguards. They also fought in wars and were considered equal to any of the other Roman armies. Chérisey’s correlation with Constantine may be related to his abolition of the Castra Praetoria, destroyed by Constantine upon his successful invasion of Italy when Maxentius ruled as the Western Roman Emperor. Their last stand was at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312 and after Constantine's victory he officially disbanded the Praetorian sending them out to different corners of the empire. This happens to be the time when Constantine was alleged to have seen the monogram of Christ in the sky!
How is a vexillum standard associated with the bodyguard shock troops of the Emperor/Cesar also associated with a red cloak thrown over Jesus? Did soldiers from the Roman cohort involved with Pilate take the cloak and make it into a banner? The legions stationed in Judea at the time of Pilate (and soldiers which would have been used by Pilate during his rule) were Legio III Gallica, VI Ferrata, X Fretensis and XII Fulminata. Is this why Signol’s name is highlighted at Saint Sulpice? Reversed this name spells LONGIS a roman guard at the crucifixion. Did he get the robe of Christ? Perhaps it is more symbolic? Was Constantine replacing the Praetorian Guard standard with his own standard, that he later called the Labarum? This was a rule under the protection of Christ, the God of the Christians? This would appear so because the last Emperor to command this Praetorian Guard, elite of Roman armies, who guarded the Emperor himself, was Maxentius. He ruled this Guard from 306—312AD. Maxentius’ father was Maximian and Constantine had earlier fostered links between himself and Maximian. This he used as propaganda to support his right to rule as Emperor in the West. However when Maximian died this propaganda changed.
‘Maxentius was eager to present himself as his father's devoted son after his death. He began minting coins with his father's deified image, proclaiming his desire to avenge Maximian's death. Constantine initially (had) presented Maximian’s death as suicide and as an unfortunate family tragedy. By 311, however, he was spreading another version. According to this, after Constantine had pardoned him, Maximian planned to murder Constantine in his sleep. Fausta learned of the plot and warned Constantine, who put a eunuch in his own place in bed. Maximian was apprehended when he killed the eunuch and was offered suicide, which he accepted. In addition to the propaganda, Constantine instituted a damnatio memoriae on Maximian, destroying all inscriptions referring to him and eliminating any public work bearing his image.
The death of Maximian necessitated a shift in Constantine's public image. He could no longer rely on his connection to the elder emperor Maximian, and needed a new source of legitimacy. In a speech delivered in Gaul on 25 July 310, the orator reveals a previously unknown dynastic connection to Claudius II, a third-century emperor famed for defeating the Goths and restoring order to the empire. Breaking away from tetrarchic models, the speech emphasises Constantine's ancestral prerogative to rule, rather than principles of imperial equality. The new ideology expressed in the speech made Galerius and Maximian irrelevant to Constantine's right to rule. Indeed, the orator emphasizes ancestry to the exclusion of all other factors: "No chance agreement of men, nor some unexpected consequence of favour, made you emperor," the orator declares to Constantine’.
The oration also moves away from the religious ideology of the Tetrarchy, with its focus on twin dynasties of Jupiter and Hercules. Instead, the orator proclaims that Constantine experienced a divine vision of Apollo and Victory granting him laurel wreaths of health and a long reign. In the likeness of Apollo Constantine recognized himself as the saving figure to whom would be granted "rule of the whole world", as the poet Virgil had once foretold. The oration's religious shift is paralleled by a similar shift in Constantine's coinage. In his early reign, the coinage of Constantine advertised Mars as his patron. From 310 on, Mars was replaced by Sol Invictus, a god conventionally identified with Apollo. There is little reason to believe that either the dynastic connection or the divine vision are anything other than fiction, but their proclamation strengthened Constantine's claims to legitimacy and increased his popularity among the citizens of Gaul.’
‘The final act of the Praetorians in imperial history started in 306, when Maxentius, son of the retired emperor Maximian, was passed over as a successor: The troops took matters into their own hands and elevated him to the position of emperor in Italy on October 28. Caesar Flavius Valerius Severus, following the orders of Galerius, attempted to disband the Guard but only managed to lead the rest of them in revolting and joining Maxentius. When Constantine the Great, launching an invasion of Italy in 312, he forced a final confrontation at the Milvian Bridge. The Praetorian cohorts made up most of Maxentius' army. Later in Rome, the victorious Constantine definitively disbanded the Praetorian Guard. The soldiers were sent out to various corners of the Empire, and the Castra Praetoria was demolished. For over 300 years they had served, and the destruction of their fortress was a grand gesture, inaugurating a new age of imperial history and ending that of the Praetorians’.
The Praetorian Guard were mostly associated with machinations, intrigues, murders and espionage in relation to the ruling Emperors. In a sense the Praetorians often dictated who would be Emperor and who had ultimate control. Because Constantine did not appear to have his own ‘Praetorian Guard’ .... by abolishing that institution he was saying he was Emperor par excellence and not under the control of the old Praetorian Guard. Why and how was this connected with the Labarum and the Constantinian vision of the monogram of Christ at the Battle of Milvien Bridge?
Chérisey, if he was behind these texts on the Hieron du Val D’Or in the Secret Dossiers, associated this Labarum, this red standard and red cloak of Christ with a red flag and essentially as the red banner of France . This became the first French flag and later the Oriflamme.
Finally Chérisey writes that the ‘devotion to the Sacred Heart is nothing more than the popularisation of a very old cult, that of the Heart of the Sky (the Sun). It is by a radiant heart that we represent the heart of Christ’. Later in France, specifically Paray-le-Monial, the locals are said to have given ‘birth to the devotion of the Sacred Heart, which is the entitlement of the Hieron du Val D’or.’. The Lobineau documents rather bizarrely then present a dynastic table. It deals with the Merovingians starting with Clovis. One of his descendants Clotaire and thereby the grandchildren of Clovis (Chilperic I and Sigebert I) seem to be of importance. These dynastic lines end with Childeric III and Thierry IV. It is also on this page that a descendant of Dagobert II is mentioned. This is Sigebert IV who has his lands in Septimania. The ‘Star of David’ is shown, and at the bottom of the page is the following quote: ‘‘it is true that, the southernmost princes and people were naturally tolerant. They for a long time accommodated the Jews, which had one of their universities at Lunel’.
Lunel is a commune in the Hérault department in southern France. Hérault (Occitan: Erau) is a department in the south of France named after the Hérault river. Hérault is one of the original 83 departments created during the French Revolution on 4 March 1790. It was created from part of the former province of Languedoc. The capital city of the region is Montpellier , which came to prominence in the 10th century as a trading centre, with trading links across the Mediterranean world and with a rich Jewish cultural life and traditions of tolerance of towards its Muslims, Jews and Cathar citizens - and later of its Protestants.
It is thought that the family of Rashi (1040 – 1105), the great Rabbi and commentator, originated in Lunel. In a family like that of Rashi we are to see the idea of a hidden prince in the Languedoc of the line of Solomon? Why? Because Rashi was an only child born at Troyes, Champagne, in northern France. But his origins are seen in Lunel. His mother's brother was Simon the Elder, Rabbi of Mainz. On his father's side, Rashi has been claimed to be a 33rd-generation descendant of Yochanan Hasandlar, who was a fourth-generation descendant of Gamaliel the Elder, who was reputedly descended from the royal house of King David.
Further insight into this is provided by the history of Provence. Provence was a province in southern France, and was a great Torah centre in the times of the Tosafists. The rabbis of Provence were separately classified as Hachmei Provence - the wise of Provence, or Provençal rabbis. Their position in matters of Halacha as well as their traditions and custom were intermediate between the Sephardic tradition of the neighbouring Spanish scholars, and the Old French (similar to the Ashkenazic) tradition represented by the Tosafists.
The term Provence in sight of Jewish tradition is not limited to the Provençal region of today but refers to the entire southern coast of France. This includes Narbonne which is sometimes wrongly transliterated as Narvona, as a result of the back-and-forth transliteration between Hebrew and French; Lunel which is wrongly transliterated as Lunil, and also the mountain city of Montpellier.
Why does the author of the Secret Dossiers keep labouring the point about Jewish history in this part of France? There was, for example, a distinctive Provençal liturgy used by the Jews of the Papal enclave of Comtat Venaissin who had remained following the expulsion of the Jews from the rest of France. This liturgy was intermediate in character between the Sephardi and Ashkenazi rites and was in some ways closer to the Italian rite than to either. After the French Revolution, when Venaissin was united to France, the Provençal rite was replaced by the Portuguese liturgy, which is used by the Jews of Carpentras today.
The Hachmei of Provence include: Moses ha-Darshan, Makhir of Narbonne and his great family, Moses ben Joseph ben Merwan ha-Levi; Joseph Kimhi and sons David and Moshe, Abraham ben Isaac of Narbonne the Eshkol, also known as the RABaD II. Isaac ben Merwan ha-Levi. At Lunel was Zerachiah ha-Levi of Girona the Baal haMaor., Abraham ben Nathan haYarhi (Yarah is Hebrew for moon, which is Lune in French, the source for the city-name Lunel), Yonatan Hakohen of Lunel, Abba Mari haYarhi, and his son Isaac.
To illustrate the point Zerachiah ben Isaac Ha-Levi Gerondi was born about 1125 in the town of Girona, Spain – hence the name Gerondi – and died after 1186 in Lunel. He was a famous rabbi, Torah and Talmud commentator and a poet. Zerachiah was born into a Rabbinic family called Yitzhari of Girona. His father was Isaac Ha-Levi, a Talmudic scholar in Provence, and the son of Zerachiah Ha-Levi, his namesake. The elder Zerachiah was a son of Shem Tov Ha-Levi, one of the greatest Talmudic scholars in Provence, who claimed direct descent from the prophet Samuel, who according to Jewish tradition was a direct descendant of Yitzhar (hence the family name "Ha-Yitzhari"), son of Kehath, son of Levi, son of Jacob.
Given all this how does it fit with a red standard and cloak of Christ, Constantine, Merovingians and the land of France in the Merovingian age? Truly bizarre. The only link that I can see is the linking of all things Jewish with the Solomonic treasure of the Temple at Jerusalem. We know that a gold cross that Childebert obtained when he campaigned in Saragossa was supposed to have been thought by him to have once belonged to King Solomon. Quite why he would have thought a ‘cross’ was linked to Solomon is not clear (Solomon was the most famous Jewish king in the Old Testament, son of King David. He built the Temple in Jerusalem and placed the Jewish sacred vessels there including the Ark of the Covenant). The campaigns against the Visigoths conceivably mean that Childebert may have got some spoils of the Visigothic treasure which essentially includes the looted Temple treasure of Solomon taken by Titus in AD70. The Secret Dossiers go on to illustrates the region of Septimania given to the descendants of Dagobert II. Note carefully the Meridians indicated on these maps - left is Gaul in 511 showing the Meridian labelled MC running to the outskirts of Paris all the way down to Septimanie & on the right the map shows Gaul in 629-632. There were no Meridians at this time! This MC Meridian seems to correlate with the MC-PRAE-CUM Meridian at Saint Sulpice, which of course is linked to a further illustration (see page 174).
At the very top of the whole page to the left is the motto ‘et in arcadia ego...’
Above: Another Meridian. Look how it is described: Figure N, except this N is reversed This Meridian begins MΩ (MC) so must be related to the Meridian at Saint Sulpice. Above map is taken from the Merian map of Paris (French: plan de Merian) was created in 1615. You can see it better HERE.
It is also interesting to note that between the original publication of the Lobineau documents and the later papers given to Rene Barnett for her Priory of Sion dossiers, these maps have been manipulated. Look again at the images on this page. The Meridian line is indicated through Septimania opposite, but not on the 1960’s publications..Above: Original 1960’s document showing two maps of Merovingian Gaul.
Above - Later document, showing the same maps with the MC Meridian added. Why?
The Lobineau documents continue with three or four pages of further genealogies culminating finally in the line leading to the Blancheforts. Illustrated are the two funerary stones of Marie de Negri D’Ables. The last page, before the start of the poem LSR, is about the origins of the Sicambrian Franks. The Sicambri appear in history around 55 BC during the time of conquests of Gaul by Julius Caesar and his expansion of the Roman Empire. Caesar wrote in his Commentarii de Bello Gallico that at the confluence of the Rhine and Meuse River a battle took place in the land of the Menapii with the Tencteri and Usipetes. When these two peoples were routed by him their cavalry escaped and found asylum north of the river with the Sicambri. Caesar then built a bridge across the river to punish the Sicambri. The Sicambri are thought to be linked to the Salian Franks or Salii. They were a subgroup of the early Franks who originally had been living north of the limes in the coastal area above the Rhine in the northern Netherlands, where today there still is a region called Salland. The Merovingian kings, responsible for the conquest of Gaul were of Salian stock. From the 3rd century on, the Salian Franks appear in the historical records as warlike Germanic people and pirates, and as "Laeti" (allies of the Romans). They were the first Germanic tribe from beyond the limes that settled permanently on Roman land. The Salians fully adopted Frankish identity and ceased to appear by their original name from the 5th century onward, when they evolved into the Franks par excellence. This is long before the Ripuarian Franks were first mentioned. The Lex Ripuaria originated about 630 around Cologne and has been described as a later development of the Frankish laws That may be the historical roots but according to the author of the Secret Dossiers there is an alternative history to be fathomed. The author suggests that the Sicambres are known later by the term ‘Ursus’ .... And he mentions the anointing of King Clovis by Saint Remi. The descendant of Dagobert II, Sigebert IV, according to the Secret Dossiers seems to have had descendants that culminated in Bera II, Count of Razes. It was this Bera II who transported an important treasure to Rhedae, capital of the County, for the reconquest of the Aquitaine. It seems that the author of the Lobineau documents is trying to draw attention to a particular point in time.
As I noted above for Lobineau it is with one of Clovis’ descendants Clotaire and thereby the grandchildren of Clovis (Chilperic I and Sigebert I) that seem to be of importance. These lines end with Childeric III and Thierry IV. Sigebert IV supposedly has his lands in Septimania. By mentioning Bera II we may be being directed to history at this time. Bera II is thought to have flourished between 845-850AD. He was a Count of Carcassonne, and came from the family of the Bellonids. The Bellonids were the descendant of the Goth Belló who ruled in Carcassonne, Urgel, Cerdanya, Conflent, Barcelona, and numerous other Catalan and Septimanian counties. Some observers have mentioned the peculiarities of the family - that, in the early years of the 10th century, all the Eastern counties of the Spanish March and the Occitan counties of Carcassone and Razès were ruled by Belló's descendants. This would have favoured the co-ruling of some territories and a clan-like network of mutual support.
Bello, who d. 812, was Count of Carcassonne and stands at the head of the Bellonid Dynasty of Carcassonne and Razes which reached its apex in Wilfred the Hairy, progenitor of the House of Barcelona. (Its interesting to note that Argila was also a Count of Carcassonne and as we saw in a previous article the Chateau of Aniort was a castle of Visigothic origin which was pledged to Argila as count of Razès in 845). The Count of Carcasonne before Argila was Bernard or Bernat of Septimania (795 – 844), son of William of Gellone. Bernard was the Frankish Duke of Septimania and Count of Barcelona from 826 to 832 and again from 835 to his execution. He was appointed to succeed his fellow Frank Rampon. During his career he was one of the closest counsellors of the
Emperor Louis the Pious, a leading proponent of the war against the Moors, and opponent of the interests of the local Visigothic nobility. His father, William of Gellone, we note according to an archaeologist, may have built the church at Rennes-le=Château, based on the Carolingian artistic practice that is perceived to be present there. Williams son Bernard “.. is first attested in historical records as one of four sons in a document of his father's dating to 4 December 804 dealing with the foundation of the monastery of Gellone. Bernard must have inherited land in the area around Toulouse from which he expanded his power to become count around 826’.
There does seem to be by a circuitous route a theme here in the Dossiers. That is, either a person, or an artefact, associated with the Jews or the Temple treasure of the Jews was placed somewhere in the environs of the old Septimania and it became entangled with the history of Rennes-le-Château. By association Saunière and perhaps other local priests were aware of this and left information for the following generation to discover. Plantard and Chérisey also seem to have left us the means to discover it and they themselves seem to have discovered it by the investigations they made perhaps via the occult connections they had in their very early days.
Somehow it is all linked to the Meridians stressed on the maps of the area included in the Dossiers and also to an important tomb in the area. These events seem to have had some bearings on the history of Rennes-le-Château itself. Out of the early counts came the Aniort family and perhaps others which could be linked to the affair at Rennes. Here the Secret Dossiers end. It is to these themes and backdrops that one must then consider the poem Le Serpent Rouge. The author refers to the Red Serpent (in the poem) as follows: turning myself again towards the east facing me I saw unrolling without end, his coils, the enormous SERPENT ROUGE cited in the parchments, salty and bitter, the enormous beast unleashed became at the foot of this white mountain, red with anger’.
It evokes shades of Boudet here for the LSR author confirming that the ‘parchments‘ are a map where the Red Serpent would be a local river. The river Sals is described as snaking along the foot of Cardou, itself described as the white mountain. Our author must be standing on Blanchefort (the white hill) looking over at Cardou but below he can see the Sals. As we will see the poem is all about the locale of Rennes les Bains & Rennes-le-Château where the red serpent ‘red with anger’ does equal the local river swollen after a storm. Boudet described it:’ The Sals or salty river, flows first from the rising [east] to the sleeping [west], and after its junction with the Blanque, towards the centre of the Stone Circle of the Redones, follows its course from the South to the North until the entrance of the gorge where it starts to draw out the first natural peaks. Until it has received the Rialses, it turns again towards the sleeping [west] and heads toward the Alder to pour its bitter waters." Above is a local diagram of the Rennes les Bains area - we can see here the River SALS, the ‘Red Serpent’, which heads towards the centre of the Stone Circle of the Redones ... the most important part of Boudet’s whole enterprise, the circle associated with the Resurrection and a very important burial.