The Cisterns of Rennes-le-Château Part 4 : Saunière and the cult of the cisterns

 

The geological formation under the village of Rennes-le-Château, especially the natural gallery of the cisterns, makes it possible to suppose that similar rectilinear and parallel fault lines, close to each other, exist. One can thus imagine that this natural network is aligned with the corridor of the known cistern. The current castle sits above this network. Because of its needs, it could not be located elsewhere in the village. The castle had two wells, including one in the buildings themselves, the other just outside.
Now let us see whether other installations did not rely or work with this underground system. If we prolong the known underground grid from the cistern, we go directly towards the spur of the plate: there is the known communal cistern – the feudal castle – the field past the castle – and from there in the direction of the cemetery, the church of Mary Magdalene and finally the area used by Saunière for his domain.

Plan 1 of the different galleries

Building the Villa Bethania

If the village was satisfied with the general water reserve, it seems that it was not the same for the consumption of Saunière.
By looking at the land register and the possibilities he had, he laid out his building works to suit several solutions and requirements: initially, he prolonged the grounds to the end of the plate. Then, he made a garden in front of the presbytery.
Let us admit that his choice, for practical reasons, revolved around the village church. At the same time, it suggests that he also wanted to have excellent views from his domain. But in practice, there are various practical problems as to how Saunière would have to use the buildings he erected. To go from his Villa Bethania to the church, he needed to go down the street. The door of the villa is in front of the access to the large garden in front, but one needs to cross the street – though the villa does have a garden to its side also, where Saunière would build his Tour Magdala. But next to the cemetery, Saunière would build another small building, which he used as his library. Why he did not build this inside his other gardens is a bit of a mystery… though no-one seems to have pointed out the anomaly.

Plan 2: the water points and the possible galleries: the domain of Berenger Saunière, the church, the cemetery and the plaza in front of the church

All of this meant that Saunière had to walk about an awful lot just to get to the various components of his estates: a garden and specifically a library. It would have been much more practical to build everything in one large domain: more seclusion, easier access, etc. Now, it seems as if Saunière was building small or large parts of an estate in various, not coherent places. Why?

Bérenger Saunière and the worship of the cisterns

Remains of another possible cistern (taken in 1988) [reproduction forbidden]

If one looks at the achievements of the abbot, one possible reason for this piecemeal approach might be the requirement to have a water supply. Then, as now, a water supply was a vital component to life – and even more so when one wants to decorate a property. Saunière wanted to have the fountains and other luxurious options he somehow could afford.
In the 19th century, the village did not have a distribution network for drinking water. Supplying the village with such a network was one of the projects that Saunière has been credited with by some – though it seems that he only saw it as an idea or a proposal – he never carried the work out himself. Still, it shows that Saunière was aware of the situation, and must have been made aware of water requirements when he trawled through the plans for his property building.
These plans reveal that there is a water point for the Tour Magdala: a large cistern installed under the rampart, connecting the tower with the glass greenhouse. The cistern enters the presbytery and the Villa Bethania. There is another cistern under the xx, and a small basin that is often forgotten in the active centre of the alley of the martyrdom, built by Saunière, and the entry of the cemetery. Finally, another large basin was in the centre of the gardens. Several authors have argued that these cisterns were filled by rain water. For one of these reservoirs, that is indeed an adequate explanation. But for others, which were not connected to the gutters of the roof, there is nothing to suggest that they would ever accumulate any great quantity of water.

The July 14, 1895 incident

In February 1891, Saunière obtained the authorization from the town council to arrange, at his own expenses, the area in front of the church. On this triangular perimeter, he built a Calvary, a cave and, close to the entry of the cemetery, an office which he would use as a library… and which sits on a cistern.
All is well until July 14, 1895, when "a fire is noticed in a house, threatening to communicate itself to the whole district almost exclusively made up of barns filled with fodder". It is necessary to pump much water to control the disaster. There is a large requirement for water (we are on the day before the heat waves) and the communal firemen and persons in charge decide to draw from the cistern of the abbot. It will not be easy as Saunière, to general amazement, refuses anyone the access to his pump. "It was necessary for the intervention of Mr. Mayor and the threat on behalf of Mr. Olive to break open the doors of his apartment so that he (the abbot) allowed people inside and delivered the pump, whereas other owners voluntarily gave the water of their cistern". Worse still is that Saunière on the following day makes a complaint to the Gendarmerie for "invasion of the floor and the fence"… a complaint which he will withdraw quickly.
There is another version of this incident. Jacques Rivière writes that the operation of the firemen forcing open the room of the pump was done because of the absence of the abbot… Though it seems the real problem lies in the fact that nobody had the keys of the room which Saunière seemed to want to protect from intruders.
One remains amazed at the reaction of the abbot having to leave a key of this room in the town hall, in case of future emergency. Certain authors see this simply as a reaction of his anti-republican mood. But is this sufficient? Didn't the risk of a fire outweigh the political resentment of the abbot… he who claims to be interested in the well-being of his flocks to the point that he planned to install for all the distribution of drinking water? This anti-Republican motivation is hardly satisfactory. And other authors wonder about this astonishing drive to maintain in control of the situation.

When a library can hide a well

And if Saunière had had personal reasons not to let anybody towards this cistern… especially not with the risk that it would exhaust the water reserve and thus perhaps to reveal something that Saunière might have desired to keep for himself?
Several authors mention the statement of an old person who told that Saunière had found something, perhaps a treasure, under this locked room. Another more precise version affirms that under the floor of this room the abbot would have suspended or immersed the products of his various excavations… Why not? What is a fact is that Bérenger liked to be locked up in this building for long hours. In truth, it is a strange place: a building built on a cistern, used as a library, in plain view of all who pass, thus not allowing any solitude to study – then again, it might have made him more visible if not popular in the village. But rather than just stay there, Saunière, who treasured his belongings and specifically his books, suddenly stores them in a place distant from his residence?

Evidence of subsidence/collapse next to the library

We further need to add that this location was not utilised before the abbot requested the use of it from the municipality. The location was not maintained. If there had been a cistern located there before the work that was carried out by Saunière, there would have been mention of it in a communal document. Specifications would no doubt have been made at the time when Saunière was allowed use of it – such as a statement that access to the cistern might be required in dire emergency! But no such thing is mentioned. It thus seems that Saunière built both the cistern as well as the building on top. However, nowhere is there any trace of payment of the workmen or for the materials used. An astonishing omission from somebody who is known to have been scrupulous with his expenditure and accounts. Even stranger still is that there is no memory of the execution of the work, which cannot have gone unnoticed – it is within spitting distance of the entrance of the church and thus progress must have been observed in weekly intervals – if not more frequent.
It is possible that there already was a tiny room in that location and that the works ordered by Saunière did not attract particular interest. Who could keep track of all the various building works, most of them much more impressive than this small room, executed by our priest?

A request for information of a certain Marcot in the 17th century

Marcot was an employee ordered to detailing the services of the parochial information, specifically historical information… which is at the very least curious on behalf of the royal services of the 17th century.

The Marcot document

He sends to Rennes, to the local priest, a request for information "to have a perfect understanding of the state of the parish"… Very curiously, he asks in the questionnaire about the water points of the parish. And we have the answer: a meticulous list of these hydrological places as they existed in the village two centuries before Saunière. We find the underground basin of the current cistern, the two wells of the castle and others completely forgotten, including one in the church for the purpose of a `fontane' (fountain?), another precisely at the location of what will become the small library of Saunière. And there are other resurgences on the plate including one on `the viel mantel' (???) which is situated, if one understands its description correctly, in what would become the domain of Saunière. But there is an even more interesting detail in this document: one learns that on “request for information”, some of these locations required specific maintenance, and that for that purpose, a man had to descend and traverse the advance of water. To this was added, laconically, that it was always a man from outside the village who was tasked with this work.

Alignment of the natural cracks and unnatural cavities

A section of the dry gallery underneath the castle and the church.

Let us again consider the assumption according to which along the natural faults, where pressure on certain points pushes water to the surface, a gallery is located in one of the cracks less wet than the other ones. It can only obligatorily (geologically) follow the same general advance and thus be near the points from where one draws water… as we saw in the case of the castle. If this underpass is as practicable as that of the cisterns, it would not have been a problem to follow a network which extends from the principal tank (of which a part would date back from the Visigothic time) to the domain of Saunière.
If Saunière’s predecessor sent the response to the questionnaire of Mr. Marcot on July 24, 1697, it is extremely likely that he kept a copy of this document or of the elements that enabled him to satisfy this request. This document could then be held in the files of the church of Mary Magdalene, and transmitted to the series of the priests following one another in this parish until the time of Saunière, who might then have used this information…
The knowledge of the points where drinking water could be found is extremely useful for a village like Rennes. Would this knowledge be forgotten? The answer might be yes or no. But it is likely that any such point would allow the villagers to guess that where there was water, there was a possible access to galleries… and these might contain more than just water. Of course, the latter is a fragile assumption… it would even be incredible if we were the only ones who would advance it. .

Does reality exceed fiction?

There are stories of numerous cavities in the village, from cavities under the church to those under the cemetery. Some are completely fabricated accounts, others are more substantial.

Further evidence of collapse and an underground section in the cemetery

One authoritative account is that of Claire Corbu and Antoine Captier, in L’Héritage de l’abbé Saunière (Nice, Bélisane, 1985). In connection with a vault under the church, they write: “one can deduce fm this that this tomb gave access to a vast enough crypt that it could receive several burials.” Further on the same page: “They arrived at the conclusion that a treasure, of royal origin, was hidden in the cellars (or caves) of the citadel of Rennes.” (p. 274)
Then there is mention along the church in the cemetery of a dangerous site, involving the fault in question. “We will remember specifically that this site will never again be used thereafter, where the grave digger of the village had failed to dig a pit there, the basement abruptly breaking down under him. Since the ground subsides there constantly, it lets us suppose that there is a cavity in the rock at this place.” (p. 275) Further information concerning the cemetery: “If abbé Bigou buried the marchioness of Blanchefort on this site, it is probably for quite a precise reason. The confidant of the last seigneuress of Rennes, Elisabeth d’Hautpoul, better known under name of Miss de Rennes, one can conceive that he was informed of a secret of which the lords of Rennes were the last holders. Did he in his turn leave a message? A message that Saunière would find and exploit to his profit a hundred years later.” Further on, there is discussion of the vault under the church and the passage towards a secret location elsewhere: “We think that the lords of Rennes used a crypt that already partially existed in the old vault of the Visigothic, then Merovingian fortress, to arrange their tombs in there. It is probable that Saunière realised this when he discovered the tomb of the lords. If he did not find documents, there were at least indices that could have led him to this crypt. But what did he find there?” (p. 280) Finally, there is a question about the fault: “That which appears most significant to us in our history is that it passes along the domain of Saunière and that it has a curved form/this fault stretches over an overall length of approximately 20 kilometres.” (p. 263) On this page, there is an incredible remark, as to how “it is a fact that it is located exactly at the foot of the Magdala tower. This is known as the undergrounds, very old, were recently discovered under the tower [we note that the book was written in 1984]. […] They can comprise rooms likely to have been used as a hiding-place with an invaluable deposit.” (p. 263-4)

Discrete reasons for a risky choice

We can now see why the church of Mary Magdalene was built in the alignment of the castle… and the current cistern. Though it would mean that like the castle it was very close to the first line of defence, the benefits of its location on the fault might have outweighed this disadvantage. The situation of both buildings on this fault would mean that there was a possibility to enter the gallery without being seen. Let us also not forget that before the church of Mary Magdalene became just that, the building was a vault under the invocation of the Blessed Virgin. It is only after the troops of Henri de Trastamare, in 1362, that the church of St Peter was destroyed and the “vault” would become the church of the village, with the patron saint Mary Magdalene. And it must be obvious that Saunière was aware of this history.
Though undergrounds there are, it is a fact of life that everything that is of interest to the researchers – the church, the cemetery, the castle, the cisterns, and the domain – is situated on one side of the village. Why? Why was it not slightly spread out, why was it all in one long line, and why was it on a line above a fault? After all, the presence of the fault would mean that building work was more cumbersome and more prone to subsidence – as can be observed in the cemetery when looking at the walls of the church. The presence of a water supply might have been the best reason, but it is clear that some multi-tasking must have gone on… And if water was the only obsession, it does not explain the frame of mind Saunière was in when he was reluctant to allow the firemen access to his cistern. Furthermore, if the galleries do fill with water – would you want to bury your cherished forefathers in a vault that is likely to flood? It is clear that there is more than might meet the eye; in the case of the crypt, it is clear that some form of human intervention must have occurred.

The difficult control of the knowledge

It is clear that there was a clear desire of the local lords to control certain elements of the village’s infrastructure. The latter make a point as it seems their vault was located in part of the underground network. But it is clear that in death, other people needed to know – the village priest must have known. Perhaps he even accompanied the coffin all the way down – certainly other people must have done so…

View of the chapel

But at the time of Saunière, no-one of the old lords was alive – Bigou had buried the last heiress, in the village’s cemetery, not in the crypt. But it was Saunière who would begin to work on the church – carrying out vital repair works. If the church was in a bad condition, an interest in the foundations of the building would not be amiss. And any subsidence would be investigated… any underground cavity was thus literally a discovery waiting to happen.
We also need to note that the priest was often the chaplain of the lord. In fact, there was often a close working relationship between these two positions. Rennes-le-Château followed this tradition. The priest often acted as a confessor and thus might have received certain privileged information. But can we assume that these priests might ever have committed this knowledge to print? Or speak about it? Perhaps it worked both ways: perhaps the lord instructed the chaplain to pass the information on to his successors. In this case, if one person would suddenly die before passing the information onwards to his descendants, the other party would be able to do just that.

A secret for the priests of Rennes-le-Château

Let us assume that the secrecy of the underground galleries of Rennes was only known to the lords and the priests. Their dwellings were furthermore situated along this same fault. And with all the work that Saunière would carry out, it is safe to argue that if he did not know of it before his works began, he would learn of them during them. But it is equally clear that Bigou and the lady of Rennes were key people in this story – as they are in the story of the “mystery” of the village.

Villa Bethania

Bigou was the last of his line, at the time of the French Revolution, when he would have to flee to Spain to escape possible harassment. His lady was also the last in line; somehow, he knew that if the secret had to be preserved, it had to be passed on in a new format. If he did, then Saunière might indeed have collected all the pieces of the puzzle before the building work began. And this seems to be likely, as it would explain his illogical pattern of building work carried out along the length of the fault line – specifically his small library next to the cemetery’s entrance. His scattered buildings suggest that he wanted to control all remaining possible access points to the underground system… and it is clear he wanted to keep it all to himself, as witnessed during the fire of 1895. Perhaps his plans for a water supply to the village was further evidence of this obsession to make sure that no-one else had access to the underground network; a new water supply would mean no-one in the village would be interested in the old network… With such obsession, we need to ask whether it was here that Saunière’s initial wealth or esteem originated from. But we also need to note that Saunière was not the last to dig in and around the cisterns: others have as well, including Corbu, who bought the estate form Saunière’s former maid. The question remains whether anything was ever found… or even whether anything was ever located there.