by Richard Reed
The observations on the features in the church, including the altar-front and the Stations of the Cross (but not the arrangement of the statues), are largely my own, based on several visits to the area and close analysis using Adobe Photoshop, which I have used in my work as a journalist for many years. There is certainly a mystery waiting to be discovered at Rennes-le-Château, but the answer almost certainly lies in the crypt. There is almost no doubt that there is a crypt, but whether the authorities will ever allow it to be opened up seems unlikely – apart from anything else, an empty crypt would ruin the tourist trade! The enigma is likely to remain for the foreseeable future.
The undercroft beneath the crypt is my invention, but the limestone geology around Rennes is riddled with underground water courses, so it’s not too much of a stretch for the imagination. Certainly the tunnels beneath the castle and the village itself are very real – no tourists are allowed to explore them, however.
The Knights Templar is probably one of the most mysterious and fascinating organisations from medieval times, and the subject of much speculation – not to mention fantasy. There seems to be some contemporary evidence that they excavated tunnels under the Temple Mount, and may well have found some archaeological artefacts. They were certainly reputed to be the guardians of a holy relic, but what, precisely, it was we shall probably never know. Again, there are plenty of wild theories masquerading as fact – including the claim, widely repeated on the internet, that the Templars’ sixth Grand Master, Bertrand de Blanchefort, was in some way connected to the Blancheforts of Rennes-le-Château. While it was sorely tempting to include this idea in the book for plot purposes, I chose not to, since the claim – made in the Holy Blood, Holy Grail – has been disproved by French historian Richard Bordes in his book Les Mérovingiens à Rennes-le-Château, mythes ou réalités. Réponse à Messieurs Plantard, Lincoln, Vazart et Cie.
I am not the first to suggest that the mysterious ‘beloved disciple’ in the Gospel of John is, in fact, Mary Magdalene, and if you analyse the wording of John you will see just how tortuous the amendments are – especially the insertion of the John figure into the crucifixion scene, where the other three Biblical gospels make no mention of him. Nor is it my idea that John is based on a text written by Mary Magdalene – that credit must go to Dr Ian Poole, who makes it the basis of his book Mary Magdalene and the Gospel of John (ISBN: 978-0955793301). I have conflated this with the idea of a ‘Lost Gospel’; I do believe that, in time, more evidence will come to light as to the true part Mary Magdalene played in Christ’s life, as with the recent discovery of the ‘Wife’ fragment. Like many, I fail to see what is so theologically challenging about the idea of Christ being married. Christianity today has strayed a long way from its roots, and like the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages, has become mired in dogma. To survive in the modern age, it needs to rediscover the spirituality of the gnostics. There is much we could learn from the Cathar approach to life.
As for Da Vinci, linking him to a holy bloodline is purely my invention, but the circumstances of his birth are certainly curious, and the references to his DNA having Middle Eastern origin are based on recent scientific research. The theory that the Mona Lisa is actually a painting of his mother Caterina has also been suggested by some experts. Close analysis of The Last Supper makes it impossible for me to believe that the figure to the right of Jesus is anything other than a woman. And as for the one-fingered gestures in many of Leonardo’s religious paintings, that is a whole new opportunity for debate!
