An overview of the writings of Henri Boudet

 

The TRUE CELTIC LANGUAGE… and other “oeuvres”

Page from the second edition

Boudet, the priest of Rennes-les-Bains and hence a close colleague of Saunière, was the author of several books and manuscripts, the best known of which is "the TRUE CELTIC LANGUAGE and the Cromleck of Rennes-les-Bains". This published work, dated 1886, by the printing firm of François POMIES, in Carcassonne, had resulted in more ink being written about it than the printer needed to print the book. Many have read the above work and have “felt” – concluded – that the work is directly related to the enigma of Rennes-le-Château.
Nevertheless, Boudet was the author of more than just this one title, and few analysts have bothered to subject his other writings to the same type of analysis, or even a comparative study.
Arbitrarily we can classify, his writings in two categories:
1) The writings of which Henri Boudet is definitely the author:
- The Name of Narbonne / Du Nom de Narbonne –1880.
- The true Celtic Language / La vraie Langue Celtique – 1886.
- Remarks on the Dialect of the Languedoc / Remarques sur le Dialecte Languedocien – 1894.
- The Book of Axat / Le Livre d’Axat – 1896.

2) Writings usually catalogued like forgery:
- Lazare Véni Foras - version "1891"
- Lazare Véni Foras - version "1914" - 317 pages (with missing p. 295).
- Lazare Véni Foras - version "1914" - 327 pages.
These last works are usually regarded as hoaxes. However, we will begin our analysis with these “fakes”, published three times under the same title.

LAZARE VENI FORAS

"Lazare Véni Foras" is first mentioned by Gérard de Sède, when he tackles the enigma of Rennes-le-Château. He states that he received from a priest, Courtauly, the information that the original manuscript was destroyed the regional religious authorities, in the presence of the author (i.e. Boudet), in 1914. De Sède adds that it is impossible that this destruction occurred, as the dates do not correspond with a chronology that places the edition in 1915.
Next, Pierre Jarnac seems to be the first person to offer severe criticism on these books, which appear to him to be of a dubious origin. His study is published in « Les Archives du Trésor de Rennes-le-Château », whereby we will quote from the 1987 edition. In the re-edition of the work, in 1998, there are some comments on the book (pages 294-295). He maintains his position that all of these works are fabrications and not the work of Boudet.

A cover for a forgery…

Lazare. First edition. Cover.

Today, the question whether or not these books are falsifications seems resolutely answered; they are merely mentioned – if at all – for their bizarre work. However, recently we were given a copy of one of these editions, which allowed us to make a study of the work at hand, and revisit a theme that few mention today.
Two of the editions are dated 1891 and 1914. This is not the only discrepancy in a book that is supposed to exist in only one edition – or according to de Sède, not at all – as the manuscript was allegedly destroyed. Apart from different dates, the number of pages and the cover is different too.
Let us begin with the cover of the 1981 edition. We see the profile of a human face, with in capital letters: LAZARE VENI FORAS.
Under the illustration is a repeat of the title, in capital letters, smaller, written with an exclamation point at the end. The date 1891 is at the bottom of the page.
On page 184 of Jarnac’s book, he explains that he has been able to find out the origins of this false edition, as well as the components that went into creating the hoax. The main component is a book by R.P. Charles Parra, published in 1924, first edition. Thus, as it is clear, there is clear evidence of a hoax.

One priest or the other …

However, we would like to add one remark to the formidable research that has been performed by Jarnac.
If we look carefully at the first cover, it is necessary to look at the name of the author. A small surprise is in stall for those with attentive eyes: we would expect to see the name of Boudet, preceded by his Christian name or his initial, that itself perhaps preceded by “Abbé” – priest. Indeed, that is what we can see – except that the author is listed as ED Boudet – whereas the priest of Rennes-les-Bains is HENRI Boudet. The second edition, that of 1914, does list “H. Boudet”, i.e. Henri.
“Ed Boudet” is no doubt short for Edmond Boudet, who could only be the brother of Henri. However, the point we are trying to make, is that as the 1891 edition lists the author as “Ed Boudet”, it should not be entered as being accredited to “Henri Boudet”. It is a small point, but a point nevertheless.

By peeling a hoax

The first illustration, of 35, in the second edition

So we live under the assumption that these writings of Boudet are fakes. This does not mean they are without any interest. Specifically, we note that de Sède makes mention of them, which would argue for the conclusion that at the time when he was writing, the “fakes” existed.
Then, let us note that a certain amount of work goes into making these forgeries, which at the time could only be done by photocopy, which was an expensive and elaborate undertaking. Furthermore, the document that is used as the source for the fake is not too difficult to find, but is nevertheless relevant to the larger theme that was being developed at the time, i.e. that of Saunière, Mary Magdalene, Jesus, etc. However, the source needs to be as little known as possible, so that trickery is not too easily or quickly revealed. All of this suggests the involvement of someone with knowledge of books, creating hoaxes, a certain expertise on religious texts, as well as access and the time to photocopy the material. The copy furthermore needs to be of a certain quality, so that it can be passed off as a genuine publication.
To this, we need to add that the “author” – hoaxer – needs to be somewhat aware of the enigma of Boudet. However, in one edition, this does not seem to be the case, as he misspells the first name of our priest: Ed. instead of Henri. It is an easy mistake to make: the mystery of Rennes-le-Château was not yet widely known, and Boudet even less so. Furthermore, in his book on the “Celtic language”, his brother Edmund had helped him, and is credited as such, with the creation of an illustration. Obviously, the person performing this hoax was confused over this issue – it is an easy mistake to make. What is more perplexing is that those who were informed of the book’s existence so easily accepted it as a work of Boudet, even though the cover suggests it is not a work by our priest !
Can we really believe that all the prima donnas of the Rennes-le-Château enigma missed this vital error? Furthermore, can we really believe that this was “just” a vulgar forgery, with no specific purpose? All this time, effort and money that was poured into this book? What if this is just one tree, in a larger forest?

The second publication of ‘Lazare Véni Foras’

Lazare. Second edition. Cover.

The second publication of 1914 would b, perhaps, a correction of the earlier mistake, making it possible to throw off the researcher: the author now became Henri, not Edmund, and perhaps the “earlier edition” of 1891 would no longer be mentioned?
Let us look at the cover of the “second edition”. This time, the name of the author is correct:

Par
L’Abbé H. BOUDET
CURE DE RENNES-LES-BAINS (AUDE)

Underneath is a depiction of the face of Jesus and information on the printer, who is listed as François POMIES of Carcassonne.

- At the top, in Italic letters, is the title of the work:
Lazare Véni Foras !

We note that once again, the title has an exclamation mark at the end.

Nine copies

The book is advertised in an esoteric publication, and put on sale by a certain Nacim Djama, who proposed the sale of this "Lazare Véni Foras" of H. Boudet. Those who order, get a complete copy of the work, where it is not Lazarus who is featured as the main character of the book… but Mary Magdalene.
At the bottom of the page, there are references to “Dépôt Légal”, and how the reproduction is apparently deposited at the B.M. of Toulouse. In the top, thre is a number, ranging from 1 to 9. The book we have been able to study is edition 1.
On the back, there is once again mention of these details:

Edition à tirage limité
Exemplaires numérotés
De 1 à 9
N° 01

Limited edition
Numbered copies
From 1 to 9
No. 01

Lazare. Second edition. first and last page of the cover.

Introducing Lazarus

The edition is accompanied by a typed page, which introduces itself as the forward of the re-publication, by the publisher. He mentions two works of Boudet, The Celtic Language and Lazarus. None of the other works are mentioned. There are some comments on the work and death of Boudet. Finally, there is warning that the book itself does not bring with it any specific useful information, but that the “attentive reader” will nevertheless find elements “in the particular style of Henri Boudet”.
We are also told that Lazarus actually came to Rennes-les-Bains, to take the waters there! Indeed, when reading this “foreword”, the reader will be left stupefied by the bizarre allegations that are made. 35 illustrations decorate the work, plus one photograph “outside of the flow of the text”, to be found at the beginning of the work, which shows the face that is visible on the Turin Shroud.

Page with the only photograph, from the second edition of Lazare.

The cover of the “book” itself is – on the edition which we have – on a pink paper, with the dimensions of 28.5 by 18.8 centimeters. Again, we can see that some time and effort has gone into the production of this volume, and once again we need to ask why.
Another question needs to be posed. Those who made enquiries into the “trafficker” of these forgeries must inevitably have turned to the address of the famous Mr. Nacim Djama of Toulouse. Why don’t they inform us what they discovered at this address and from this man – and perhaps even his real name? Did they not ask questions as to why he was circulating this forgery? It is difficult to believe that no single researcher wanted to learn more! Yet, if some researcher asked, that researcher apparently has never reported his findings, it seems. Such an analysis would definitely prove to be intriguing and may have shed some light on the reasons why… Though pure monetary gains may have been one possibility, it is clear that no-one would ever have become rich some selling nine copies… Though perhaps the sale was merely done at a time when the forger was in desperate needs of funds, and knew that a larger-scale operation could be dangerous… perhaps… but there are easier and quicker and better money-making schemes than this one !