courtesy of the author, dr. Mario Arturo Iannaccone. Published on "Science and Paranormal n.59)
From Mystery or Myth @ http://www.duepassinelmistero.com/. . With many thanks to; the post_master@duepassinelmistero.com for permission to translate and publish this most interesting article by Mr Iannaccone.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
It is difficult to come across someone today who is completely unaware of the "mystery of Rennes-le-Château". Publishing and television have only re-proposed it with particular insistence. The novel The Da Vinci Code, which sold 20 million copies, varied its content making them even more popular. The fantasy reality, the enchanted story, as Giuseppe Romano defined it, reigns, but "it does not arouse any debate about historical reliability". Investigating people's judgments, it is observed that for the most part "the appreciation for the book does not contain any distinction between the interest of the plot, the validity of the references, the cultural message and the quality of the writing. Rather, it concerns the work in its entirety, taken literally: as if everything contained in it was gold cast".[1]
Fiction and history seem, in the end, to have merged into a single current. This phenomenon, in the long run, can become very dangerous. Brown's novel, apparently, is based on a historical "basis" that should, in some way, ratify its value and credibility: the so-called "mystery of Rennes-le-Château". And therefore it is convenient to shed light in this direction. The origin of this "mystery" is commonly attributed to a "terrible" secret discovered by Bérenger Saunière (1852-1915), a French priest born and who lived in the extreme southern part of the country, the Aude, not far from the border with Spain. According to the most widespread hypothesis, he would have found something that would "unequivocally" prove that Jesus survived the cross and had children with Mary Magdalene. However, there is no shortage of alternatives that hypothesise that the secret may be of another kind: the treasure of the Temple of Jerusalem, the Grail cup, a procedure to become immortal, the memory of a cyclical catastrophe, and much more. In any case, Saunière would have come to part - perhaps inadvertently maybe not - of the existence of an occult, branched and powerful society, the Priory of Sion, (of which Leonardo da Vinci would have been part in excellent and qualified company), which had the purpose of managing the secret. All this would be proven by a complex network of inscriptions on stone, messages inserted in paintings, scrolls, letters, annotations and books. From the beginning, some encrypted scrolls, photographed and then disappeared, the heart of a narrative machine with perpetual motion, are at the centre of all speculation. There is practically nothing true about this myth, which has fed and feeds so much New Age literature, and magical-esoterica. Obviously some statements concerning Jesus and his private life - even abstracting from questions of faith - are completely undemonstrable, both negative and positive, especially if supported by false documents, fabricated and often examined only by those interested in the dividends of the "mystery" industry. As bizarre as it may seem, the most reliable historical documents on Jesus, Mary and other evangelical characters are the Gospels. This is affirmed by a rigorous and secular biblical science that is based on the historical method in all its specialisations.
Bérenger Saunière became, in spite of his own, the main character of the myth that had three main phases: the first, fed during the tens and until the thirties by the French writer Maurice Leblanc (1864-1941); the second, between the fifties and the seventies, by a trio of French writers and adventurers (G. De Sède, P. de Chérisey, P. Plantard); the third, developed by three Englishmen (M. Baigent, R. Leigh, H. Lincoln) who reworked the scheme by depositing it in the New Age culture broth, where it was further, almost monstrously, developed as an alternative history or counterhistory, in defiance of any rational process of verification of facts and statements. Each group introduced new elements, gave new directions to the "invendages", falsified and further polluted the scene. A procession of hundreds of improvised historians gave the baton, inventing "evidence", "contacts", "finds", "testimonies" screaming discoveries after discoveries, but avoiding the only activities that should allow the reconstruction of past events: the application and control over historical sources, the verification of their reliability, their insertion in the political and social context. And finally their thoughtful interpretation.
The good faith betrayed by too many readers, seriously convinced that they have found a "revelation" in this myth and in its subsequent metamorphoses (up to the Da Vinci Code) should make us think about the whole story. The author of the da Vinci Code, for his part, claims in a now famous note entitled Historical Information to support his narration on "historical documents and truths", since, "secret documents and rituals" contained in the novel "defy reality". 2] And this is the ambiguous, questionable and disturbing point of the whole operation. Because those documents and that alleged truth rest on one of the most elaborate historical-literary scams of the last century. And that recall is made without any irony, that ironic typical of exchangeable use operations of literary materials and historical materials. Precisely the absence of irony, implicit or explicit, places the operation within the scam itself or at least in the ambiguous area of collusion. Fortunately, today, we can approach the historical truth and not its simulacrum. However, of the millions of readers who will be exposed to the novel, few will approach the rational and documented reconstruction of the myth - not already mystery - of Rennes-le-Château.
It is established that the Priory of Sion - the alleged millennial guardian of the "terrible secrets" - was a small group of agitators whose leader wanted to present himself as the last exponent of the Merovingian dynasty. All the supposed secrets presented by the group are based on a complicated design of literary and historical inlays, falsifications, half-truths and inventions that an unusually complacent cultural machine has spread especially for about fifty years now. This counterfactual corpus is reinforced by deliberately aberrant interpretations of monuments, works of art, symbols of traditional religiosity and literary passages. We have often seen in the movies that, when you want to keep someone away from a locality, you change the directions of the directions. This operation, metaphorically, was done systematically in this matter. "Serious" scholars have for years reacted with disdain to the historical neoplasm produced by the myth, delaying its study. This desire not to get your hands dirty was explained by Massimo Introvigne, the only one who studied it: "the legends that attract tourists to Rennes-le-Château are so extreme that the same specialists in esotericism [...] hesitate to deal with them, fearing to be confused with the mythomaniacs and scammers who have signed a good number of titles on the subject".[ 3]
Saunière and the story of the priest "of the billions"
The "mystery" of Rennes-le-Château, with its offshoots that include Nicolas Poussin, Leonardo da Vinci, the Templars is composed of many stories artificially compared, independent episodes often "recorded" with forcing, omissions and fabrication of forges. But the surprise that is emerging today, with an examination of the lives of the people involved as characters (and not as people) in this affair is that the group of priests and laity at the centre of the secret of Rennes, painted as "occultists", "esoterists" or "hermetists", part of the secret of the Priory of Sion, were exactly the opposite. They fought, that is, their cultural battles, on the barricade opposite the one in which they were placed in the fictional reconstruction. Saunière, the protagonist, was an ancient Catholic, devoted to the Sacred Heart, to the message of Lourdes, to monarchical messianism. So the other people associated with him as "magician" and "mystery". Their alleged frequentations so often repeated, so often given for "seated" with famous men of culture, radical politicians and Freemasons and then magicians, esotericists of all fact, are completely invented. Deliberately, the creators of the mystery made real characters act like fictional characters, making them say, think and do things they never said, thought and did. This falsification has been so well woven that for a long time, – accomplice the inertia of historians and the cynicism of certain editors, – it has not been affected. We will now see what the meaning and purpose of this complex operation is, and we must also admit that the deconstruction of such a "machine", capable of producing such a mythological-literary delirium, is a fascinating activity.
It is therefore necessary to start from the historical context to discover that, at the origin of the myth of Rennes-le-Château, there is a political mockery directed against well-selected environments. In those years, in France, the government men, radicals and socialists largely Freemasons of the Great East, advocated a policy adverse to the Catholic Church, priests, Christian customs and the monarchy. Dismantled Napoleon's Concordat of 1805, the church felt threatened and saw its freedoms reduced. The dissolution of educational and religious institutions, the confiscation of ecclesiastical real estate and property, entrusted to third-party entities, provoked strong reactions in the Catholic world. Semi-clandestine associations of lay and priests were organized that dedicated themselves to actions of cultural and political contrast. The Catholic reaction was based, in part, on pre-existing secret societies that first flourished during the seventeenth century, and reorganised after the Revolution thanks to the work of the Austrian Father Diessbach and the Italian Father Lanteri.
René Goblet (1828-1905), Minister of Education, Art and Worship and then Prime Minister, in the years 1885-1887. Radical deputy, he was the first to deal with the "nest of subversive" Catholics in the South of France. He called for Saunière's removal. It is the first act of a political-literary comedy that will reach the present day, through continuous metamorphosis. They spread everywhere by organising, among other things, counter-information actions, clandestine networks for the distribution of books and "good press", secret libraries, publishing houses. But in the area of Carcassonne, Narbonne and Toulouse, where these activities were particularly organised, something else happened that involved the great historian Jean-Baptiste Guiraud (1866-1953), one of the recognised leaders of this network of political and cultural volunteering. Guiraud, a native of a small village a few kilometers from Rennes-le-Château, Quillan, was linked to a network of friendships and dating that included those who will become characters and figures of the "mystery". His "anti-government" activities were very annoying; he organized private schools where textbooks were adopted, written by him, with historical interpretations divergent from those imposed by republican historiography. He began to fight all out and with an open face against the government's anti-Catholic policy both in Paris and in Quillan and the cities of the South, where he went every summer with his family.
In 1913 he published in Paris, under the pseudonym of Jean Fabre, a book, Un initié des sociétés secrètes superieures: Franciscus eques a capite galeato,[4] which provoked harsh controversies between the Catholic and the secular world and within the Masonic world. The purpose of this book was to hit the Masonic-radical world by revealing some of its secrets. Perhaps it is also because of this action that Guiraud, "after various admonitions and the freezing of both advances and transfers to more prestigious places", because of his ideas, in the same 1913 received an official disapproval from the Minister of National Education.[ 5] It will be discovered, years later, that the documents that had made this publication possible, had been taken away from a family attended, as a teacher, by Alfred Saunière (1855-1905), Bérenger's brother. The two were implicated in the theft of eighteenth-century documents published in the 1913 book, which caused a sort of "P2 scandal" ante litteram. Fabre-Guiraud's publication revealed secrets that damaged the cause of Freemasonry for years, revealing lists of names and circumstances that were to remain hidden. Guiraud had non-idyllic relations with the most famous French esotericist of the twentieth century, René Guénon (1886-1951), a collaborator like him in the Catholic magazine "Regnabit" to which Hoffet also contributed. Guiraud's publication flared up controversy for over a decade causing a storm of publications and counter-publications that engaged the most prestigious pens of the Freemasonry-anti-Mason rework controversy of France of those years. These controversies were then prestigious characters such as the father Anizan, founder of the Oblate Missionaries of Mary Immacolate, Monsignor Jouin, animator of the combative Revue internationale des sociétés secrètes and, again, Émile Hoffet, a scholar who became, in spite of himself, a "character" and "mask" in the myth of Rennes. Guiraud was even long linked to the editorial circles involved in the "Leon Taxil case", an alleged converted Freemason, one of the most famous French controversies of the late nineteenth century along with the "Dreyfuss case".
Bérenger Saunière, for his fiery sermons and for contacts with legitimist monarchists, had already drawn attention to himself in his youth, so much so that René Goblet, the Minister of Education, Art and Cults in charge in 1886, had requested his immediate removal from the bishop of Carcassonne. The attacks and resistance to radical-socialists, to Freemasonry, to radical deputies and ministers came from traditionalist environments and veined with millennialism. Two opposite, irreconcilable worlds clashed and did not understand each other. Guiraud and many of his friends believed in the advent of the Great Monarch, the Messianic king, restorer of the monarchy, of Christian France and the pope king. And they supported the doctrine of the Social Kingdom of Christ. The Catholics of the Midi were also involved in "subversive" activities such as support for the nobility that supported the pretenders to the throne (several succeeded between 1883 and 1909) who resided outside the borders of France. Today it is therefore possible to argue, on the basis of circumstances and concordant documents, that the myth of Rennes originated from a bitter political struggle, a duel of actions and counter-reactions, events and attacks. And precisely a sort of revenge, mockery, a mockery devised by radical-socialist and Masonic circles that are well identifiable, against the Catholics at Saunière, Guiraud and Hoffet, was his scaturine. A mockery ad personam but above all a mass to the prim of their ideal world of faith, prophetism, appearanceism and the political project that wanted the rebirth of a Christian society in France.
First half: Maurice Leblanc and Arsenio Lupin
The most singular discovery - due to some French authors and especially to P. Ferté, however, did not lead to the extreme consequences of his brilliant intuition[6] - is that the writer who began to make fun of these "Catholicisms of the South", was Maurice Leblanc (1864-1941), the creator of the gentleman thief Arsène Lupin. He came apart - certainly through police reports provided to him by his brother-in-law, Minister of the Interior, Police and Cults, Goblet's own successor - from the activity of Catholic activists and began to mock their mysticism of monarchical and "very Catholic" France. Maurice Leblanc scattered his novels with allusions that anticipated the myth of Rennes-le-Château, mocking, with veiled irony, the subversives of the South. His literary encryption will try to make "historical truth" many years later. Leblanc, author of the series of novels dedicated to Arsène Lupin, reasoned more or less in this way: "those deluded priests and lay people are waiting for the Grand Monarch, the Chyren, the Henryc prophesied by Nostradamus who will bring the monarchy to the throne and establish the social Kingdom of Christ? Well, for now they will have to settle for the thief Arsène Lupin as Grand Monarch". In his novels, to be read in an anti-Catholic key, Leblanc foreshadows many elements of the myth of Rennes-le-Château and crowns Lupin nothing less than as the Great Messianic Monarch. The Norman writer knew perfectly the tradition of Catholic prophetism, also because he was born near Gisors, a fundamental place of nationalist mysticism. This nationalist and religious ideology attributed to France a messianic value similar to that attributed to it during the Revolution, but with a counter-revolutionary sign. But his great monarch, mockingly crowned King of the World, is a gentleman and Luciferian thief: Lupin. About twenty novels by Leblanc contain, with the use of the phonetic cabal, - also used in a simplified form by Brown - allusions to the world of the Catholic and monarchical network of the Midi, even going so far as to name people and places of the future mystery (such as those of Boudet and Gélis).
The teasing begins in the 1909 novel, the Aiguille Creuse. The story is set in 1895 and in it Arsène Lupin discovers the "fortune of the kings of France", the Merovingians. This "hollow spire" recalls the mysterious cromleck with which Henry Boudet - a commoner and a very certain acquaintance of J-B. Guiraud - he pointed out with a much more serious attitude than that of the joker Leblanc in the bizarre book, La vrai langue celtique et le cromleck de Rennes-les-Bains (1880). According to legends also reported by other nineteenth-century writers, this mysterious cromleck (near Arques) was hollow at the base and hid immense fortunes, "billions". These are the first bricks of an extraordinary imaginary construction, which will make millions of victims gabbate by the purest ésprit de finesse. Notice, in the image, Lupin (saint-Lupin is the saint of Carcassonne) who observes an encrypted parchment... Arsène Lupin observes an encrypted parchment that holds a royal secret. During this novel, set in 1895, Lupin discovers the "fortune of the Kings of France" under a "hollow spire" (aiguille creuse) that irresistibly recalls, through allusions, Henri Boudet's cromleck.
Second half: that smart Pierre Plantard
At the end of the 1930s, when both Leblanc and Guiraud were still alive, Pierre Plantard (1920-2000) was also co-opted in that environment of artists, hermetists, occultists and senior officials. In 1940, Freemasonry was banned by the Pétain government, and the young Plantard was put at the head of a para-Masonic association as a "straw man". He was left free to act and compromise while his powerful inspirers (all identifiable) remained in the shadows. He was arrested, perhaps he collaborated with the occupiers, he certainly "burned" himself in those environments that seemed to have welcomed him until that moment. But it came as part of a heritage of allusions, memories, moffied ciphers. He learned of those old priests and laymen who had "footed" eminent Freemasons and who had got into an end with the police. He knew that a number of Catholics, lay people and priests, including Bérenger and Alfred Saunière, Monsignor Arsène Billard, Antoine Gélis, Henry Boudet and even a Bigou (another "character" of the very complicated construction) had ended up in Leblanc's allusions. He made it clear in the bibliography at the reissue of the eccentric book La vrai langue celtique of the priest born in the same village of Guiraud, Henri Boudet. Plantard began to play with these themes: he passed himself off as a seer, called himself Chyren like the Great Monarch of Nostradamus (and Leblanc), remained linked to the mysterious environments of Paris. So the invention of his life: in 1956 he founded the Priory of Sion (a private association, regulated by the law of 1901) complete with statutes and a magazine. An intuition also arrived: to present himself as the heir of the Merovingians, an inheritance that would have given him an advantage over the many Grand Masters of competing orders. To do this, he invented the story of the parchments found by Saunière, literally reworking Lupin's novels. And he invented the character of the "cure of the billions". Plantard's real masterpieces are the fakes (certainly not a novelty; the history of magical and esoteric movements is full of "patacche"). The "evidence pollution" carried out by the enterprising Parisian and his accomplices are based on an economy of falsification that borders on genius. ___ The last novel of the cycle of Arsène Lupin (Les milliards d'Arsène Lupin, 1939) composed when Plantard took his first steps in the world of hermetic politics. On the right, about fifteen years later, the character of the "cure of the billions". Plantard wanted to stand out so that his filiation was more prestigious than that of the Templars to whom the Scottish Masonism was already recalled. He then invented a spin-off of the Templars, a pre-existing super order superior to the Red Cross knights themselves, the "secret tradition of the Priory of Sion", with all those testimonial prestige from Leonardo da Vinci to Isaac Newton. In this work he was helped by gifted friends: Philippe de Chérisey, art lover, actor, Belgian nobleman; and Gérard de Sède, radical and anti-clerical journalist. The trio built up, for its own use and consumption, a counter-history supported by secret genealogies, fake documents, pseudo-bibles, tombstones and stems reconstructed by conjecture. He invented relationships, correspondences, love friendships between people who had never seen each other, a shadow theater of baroque redundancy. In short, he set up a masterpiece of disinformation in which some newspaper journalists also participated in collateral roles. The story culminated in the rediscovery of the Saunière brothers whose mores someone had remembered.
Plantard, de Sède and de Chérisey made a sort of unofficial company and wrote the first books that enjoyed considerable success. De Sède couldn't find a better subject. It exceeded a dozen titles based on this subject. Plantard, for his part, succeeded in what he "wanted": success and visibility. He became, in a certain way, a personality, in fact he himself reacted the part of the "character"; he remained on the crest of the wave for at least twenty years, from the early 60s to the early 80s. During this period he was interviewed by radio, television, newspies; he collaborated on the writing of books and was considered a powerful man. In 1981 President Mitterand, on an election tour, went to Rennes-le-Château and had himself photographed on the spot. This episode seemed to confirm what Plantard was saying, but in reality it was only an indication of the notoriety that the history of Rennes had gained in France in the gauchist and radical circles. Plantard, with all his talk of the Templars and the Priory of Sion, as a secret super-society above all, above Freemasonry, exposed himself too much. And "the envy of the gods" arrived to punish his "hybris". First of all, his initiative to call himself Pierre Plantard de Saint-Clair from the mid-seventies was annoying. Thus he accredited himself (illicitly) as heir to the family guardian of the Rosslyn chapel, the church near Edinburgh at the centre of the founding legends of "Scotish" Freemasonry. In short, not only did he pass himself off as heir to the Merovingians (and steps, it's a French theme) and the Templars (he's in numerous company) but he dared to belong to the family lineage that had favoured, according to legends, the birth of speculative Freemasonry.
Third half: the revenge of the Grail
It was too much. So three English authors (the direct inspirers of Dan Brown) linked to the environments of esotericism nourished in the shadow of certain "High Degrees" contact him, interview him, give him rope. They are: Henry Lincoln, who produced three famous BBC documentaries and two esotericists, Richard Baigent, respected exponent of the Scottish Rite Freemasonry and editor of "Freemasonry today" and his colleague Richard Leigh. Within a few years they wrote two bestsellers, The Holy Blood, Holy Grail (1982) and The Messianic Legacy (1986), which hit several purposes at the same time: they ridiculed Plantard, the "toy" (his creation), and finally transformed the myth by asserting that Saunière's secret was not Plantard's Merovingian ancestry but nothing less than the survival of a "lineage of Jesus", the Sang Réal. To build their books they insert chapters on the question of the Gnostic Gospels, the "yellow" of the translation delays of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Essenes, the Cathars, the Council of Nicaea, the Inquisition, the primacy of the pope, the saints, the Madonna, the question of the celibacy of priests, the debate on the riches of the church, the female figures in Christianity, the Second Vatican Council, the schism of Lefebvre ("reinvented" as the guardian of the secret and blackmailer of the pope). This scheme will be re-proposed in more than four hundred books of "historical research", in reality "counter-factual", and in many novels including The Da Vinci Code.
Despite its crudeness, today the myth of Rennes-le-Château is a cultural theme used by hundreds of authors of magical-religious milieus and even the so-called "cults of flying saucers". It has been welded to all possible counter-history, to the theories of conspiracy and counter-conspiracy and above all to a book production that too often has no respect for the intelligence of its readers, their right to be informed on the basis of truthful and uninvented information. Comics, movies, novels, video games, hundreds of websites draw direct inspiration from the myth. Soldered to many mythical systems, it has been exported to New Zealand, USA, Canada, South America, Austria, Germany, England, Italy. Religious and magical movements were created that found in Saunière an unlikely inspirer and teacher, which annually organise pilgrimages to the Church of Santa Maria Maddalena in the Pyrenean village. There are guides who, alongside Stonhenge and Giza, recommend Rennes-le-Château as a sacred pilgrimage destination. All this, in the same area of Lourdes. Really, it is an extraordinarily successful operation, gone beyond all the rosy prediction of the gentleman writer, Maurice Leblanc.
The final phase, the one we have been witnessing for about twenty years, is a media montage, with obvious purposes of anti-Catholic propaganda. Beyond this aspect, however, the most serious fact is the expiry of the historical debate. Books of pure invention, written without any scrupulousness either moral or scientific, are passed off as serious investigations and placed, in bookstores and libraries, on the shelves dedicated to history, next to works built on serious and difficult investigations. Victim of this story is above all the serious, moral discipline of historical research, its proceedings, its rational demand for order and truth. History is certainly an activity subject to interpretation but interpretation must be done compulsorily on truthful sources and not false, not blatently false.
Brown's method
Being aware that the myth of Rennes-le-Château, as it is presented, is a frame, Dan Brown states in the text that his work is based on "historical facts" and defended its contents even "in the context of reality". The novelist Brown and the polemicist Brown both use the "proof" of the "verifiable" existence of the Priory of Sion. His literary machine, for the delicate topics at stake, is not set in motion by literary play (by definition ambiguous) but by lies. The Code da Vinci is a thesis novel, an undeclared pamphlet. This has been noted by many commentators, but most have smiled and shrugged their shoulders wrongly justifying the artifice as a "literary expedient". Many novels (think of the "scartafaccio" of the Betrothed or the Manuscript found in Zaragoza) set in motion their narrative machines by resorting to similar expedients. But Brown's case is different: his enunciation is not veiled with any ambiguity, his is built to appear truthful and even true. The Secret Dossiers, apocryphal documents deposited in the National Library of Paris, which would prove the existence of the Priory of Sion and its treasure chest of bulging secrets, are presented as authentic in Brown's book exactly as in hundreds of dishonest volumes. Brown's operation - in itself not illegal because it is literary - bends alleged documentary truths for the purposes of ideological-religious propaganda. For this reason, Brown's operation (and those behind him) is not harmless or innocent, but cynically uses fakes to reinforce the "author's" extra-diegetic thesis. Not surprisingly, Mariano Tomatis, recalled, mutatis mutandis, for this unscrupulous use of truth and falsehood, the Protocols of the of Sion.[ 7] The prudence of the times and the experience of the past would advise to veil pamphlets on such delicate topics with ambiguity.
Lately, the myth of Rennes-le-Château was slated by the continuous erosion of truthfulness. The last ones, among the texts that have re-proposed it, show an extreme fatigue of inventiveness. It was necessary to "relaunch" the offer by renewing the product. It was necessary to return to the novel from which we had started (with Les Templiers sont parmi nous, from 1962 by de Sède). A publishing agency has chosen the conspiracy author Dan Brown for the necessary, already author of Angels and Demons (where he alludes to a universal conspiracy whose ranks are pulled from the Vatican), a very explicit writer about his purposes, (a visit to his personal site can be very informative). Soon, a Hollywood colossal will further enhance the Kulturkampf implied in these operations: rewriting history with the carefree rotogravures, bending it to the ease of talk shows. With all due respect to the many naive and passionate of the novel who, gathered in a forum, finally greeted the arrival of the "truth" era, "radical truth", in history. You can be sure that Maurice Leblanc's mocking smile has never gone away.
(M.A.Iannacone)
NOTES:
[1] The enchanted story in “Sunday”, n. 42, (2004).
[2] Brown D., The Da Vinci Code, translated. it., Mondadori, Milan 2003, p. 9.
[3] Introvigne M., Dalla farsa alla tragedia, in Cardini F. - Introvigne M. - Montesano M., Il Santo Graal, Giunti, Florence 1998, pp. 147-159 (ivi p. 147).
[4] Fabre B., Un initié des sociétés secrètes supérieures: Franciscus eques a capite galeato, La Renaissance Française, Paris 1913.
[5] Messori V., "Preface" to Elogio della Inquisizione, Leonardo Editore, Milan 1994.
[6] Ferté P., Arsène Lupin, superior inconnu. The key to the coded work by Maurice Leblanc, Guy Trédaniel, Paris 1990
[7] Conference The Da Vinci Hoax, World Skeptics Congress, Abano Terme October 2004.From Mystery or Myth @
| The topics of this article are in depth in: |
Rennes-le-Chateau, a decipherment. The occult genesis of myth (Sugarco editions, Milan 2004)
| New pages of discoveries are also dedicated to the Priory of Sion in the book by M.A.Iannacone: |
Templars, the martyrdom of memory. Mythology of the Knights of the Temple (Sugarco Editions, 2005)Related sections on this site: