The case of the devil Part 8: When one demon hides another

 

From Gérard de Sède into Hebrew

Anyone who has entered the church of Rennes-le-Château has always been taken aback by the strange presence of a statue that sits as a guardian near the doorstep. A demon, weighed down by the holy water on top of him, itself surmounted by four angels that have been frozen in time while they are making the sign of the cross. As mentioned, it is not a unique representation of such a demon, as others exist in nearby towns and villages, and some as far away as Italy.
But who is this demon? Though Christianity has reduced all evil to one character, the very fact that the devil has more than one name – whether Lucifer or Satan – is a clear reference to the likelihood that in origin, there were several devils and demons, most of whom have been exorcised from the pages of religion.
But when the book of demonology is opened, we are no doubt doing the same thing than Gérard de Sède, who was the first to argue that this demon was none other than Asmodeus. Indeed, de Sède is the only one who has tackled the identity of this creature; his identification has never been questioned, until we did so in a previous part. Noting that de Sède is known to have made a series of errors, including even some if not several falsifications that suited his case, his identification of Asmodeus has nevertheless not been questioned, by friend or foe.

If this were Asmodeus, let us note that as a name, it originates from Hebrew, Achemedai, Asmeday, Chammadai as well as Hashmodai, who was the commander of the Shedim, demons that sacrificed their wives and daughters. He is present in the Book of Tobit, but – as these things go – we always find that the demon is vanquished, not by water as Saunière depicted him in the church, but by the angel Raphael, who binds the demon in a cave in Upper Egypt.

Leafing through Grillot de Givry

We cannot read the mind of Gérard de Sède, nor can we ask him, but we can imagine that his choice of Asmodeus was straightforward: not only was the demon said to have helped with the construction of the Temple of Solomon, he was also said to have guarded over a treasure. And in the treasure story that Saunière made the mystery of Rennes-le-Château into, the guardian demon that was Asmodeus fit the requirements perfectly. Noting that the church was often seen as a Masonic temple, and/or that there was speculation that the treasure was the very treasure of the Jerusalem Temple, these elements together no doubt resulted in the general acceptance of de Sède’s identification of the demon as Asmodeus.
But for anyone who reads or pages through works on demonology, a different conclusion begins to take form. The work of Grillot de Givry contains a large number of drawings of demons and what they are meant to look like. The book thus contains an image of Asmodeus. And when seeing him, we were surprised, for the image of this demon is not at all like the demon that we encounter in Rennes-le-Château. The “official appearance” of Asmodeus is of a creature that looks like a snake, has three heads (one of bull, a ram and a human head crowned by fire) and different animal feet – and various other appendages. This creature is totally at odds with the rather innocent looking demon that sits in Rennes-le-Château. Indeed, whereas the Asmodeus in the book is a frightening creature, the Asmodeus in the church is, well, perhaps not too difficult to get along with. Indeed, apart from their wings, the creatures seem to have little in common.

Mister or Mistress Eurynomus?

When we continue to page through our demonology books, we chance upon another demon that this time does resemble the image of the statue of Rennes-le-Château. And that creature is known as Eurynomus.
Eurynomus is depicted as having one knee on the ground, his hands are folded, even his hands are very similar if not identical to the posture “Asmodeus” has taken in the church. Let us also note that his head has corns, the eyes are larger than normal and his mouth is open, with the teeth showing. His dress also has one shoulder naked, though, of course, in a black and white publication, we have no idea whether the colour of his dress might be identical or not to that of the demon inside the church. The only difference is that whereas in Rennes-le-Château, the demon has wings; in this book, the demon has a fox’s skin on his back.
Most interestingly, in demonology, Eurynomus is the personification of death, and he is labelled as its prince. He is decorated with the Great Cross of the Order of the Fly, a distinction which the Lord of the Underworld has reserved to those dignitaries that have been shown to be most efficient and loyal.
Eurynomus, we need to note, is also the name of a Greek divinity, who created the cosmos. She was dethroned by Rhea and was thrown in the ocean or Tartaros, which is of course one of the rivers linked with the Underworld.

A Demonic Symbol

It is therefore clear that the images of demonology do not correspond with the conclusion drawn by Gérard de Sède. What to think of that? For sure, we cannot assume that Saunière wanted a specific demon visualised. Perhaps he merely asked for “a” demon, and someone made him “a statue of a demon”, with no further questions asked, or specifications given. But it is clear that claiming he is Asmodeus, is a difficult to substantiate conclusion, especially if we open another book on demonology, this time from Collin de Plancy, dating back to 1863, where once again the depiction of Asmodeus is not conform to the statue in the church. In short, the statue in the church resembles more Eurynomus than it does Asmodeus, and if it is meant to represent anything, it must be Eurynomus – though whether this was a desire of the statue maker, or Saunière, is unknown.

For the standard explanation of the mystery – if there is such a thing – the fact that it is not Asmodeus might be upsetting, for age-old convictions that he was a key indicator that a treasure was hidden here, should now be abandoned. If Saunière did specifically pick Eurynomus, what was it in his attributes that attracted him to this demon? Within the context of “The Rise”, the fact that Eurynomus was linked with the underworld and was even its prince, might be a very important indicator, for it shows that if Saunière was indeed involved with a pagan cult of the dead, a demon associated with the dead, would be a welcome presence in his church. Let us note that in magic, statues were said to be magically “charged”, to become alive. And if such a practice was done by Saunière, well, then the “spirit” of Eurynomus would be invited to be present in this statue.
Furthermore, if Saunière was indeed into the dead, rather than into a treasure, we can find a further parallel with his interest in Perillos. Here, he describes two locations as tombs – a word obviously linked with the dead – and we have long underlined how by apparently sheer coincidence, the postcode of Perillos happens to contain, of all possible numbers, 666 – the number of the Beast or… the Devil.

Rotting corpses

Eurynomus was specifically linked with rotting corpses, as he was said to strip the flesh from the bones of the dead. His role as “Lord of the Flies” must have come about because flies, maggots and vultures all fed on corpses.
He was also the subject of a tradition at Delphi, in Greece, according to which he devoured the flesh of dead human bodies and left nothing but the bones. Pausanias added that in a painting in Greece, “He is of a colour between blue and black, like that of meat flies; he is showing his teeth and is seated, and under him is spread a vulture’s skin.” In short, as Lord of the Dead, Eurynomus fits neatly into the mystery of Rennes-le-Château, linked as it is with tombs, crypts, etc. Even within the framework of the so-called sceptics, namely that Saunière got rich purely for selling masses for the dead, Eurynomus is a fit candidate. Asmodeus, well, he is not.

André Douzet & Filip Coppens