In The Da Vinci Code,
Holy Blood, Holy Grail, and other books of this genre , the dominant forces of Western
history, represent the powers of ideological normativity as they engage in a
conspiracy to obliterate heretical (i.e., progressive) practices; meanwhile
subdominant forces, represented by the subtle influence of secret societies,
heretics, are engaged in a conspiracy to preserve knowledge not only of
Christ's bloodline, but of , an enlightened form of spiritual knowledge. This
story of a sub-dominant conspiracy struggling against, and always in danger of
being over-mastered by, the ideological array of the dominant culture is a
major feature of such book's narrative.
Holy Blood, Holy Grail dramatizes its acts of reconstruction as a heroic
struggle against the odds, a mission to reveal what's been erased in the
historical record. Medieval silences often signal conspiracy for the authors,
but the period's lack of documentation is as fertile for them as it is
disabling, and medieval texts operate as a motivating resistance to the work of
narrative in this alternative history, opening up
spaces for speculation and reconstruction in the very gaps where the historical
record proves most resistant to interpretation. Texts operate as agencies in
this alternative history; they signal a crucial,
diffuse intentionality focused on shaping the historical record. And even where
such texts fail in their immediate aims, they also succeed to the extent that
they have left behind some trace of this intentionality in their wake.
Like academic
interpreters, Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh understand that the rare
survival of medieval materials represents a problem for reading. This is where
the status of the corpus begins to matter most for these authors. “The Dark
Ages, we discovered, had not been truly dark,” they remark. “On the contrary,
it quickly became apparent to us that somebody had deliberately obscured them”
(Baigent et al. 234).
While the watchword
of the modern text is ubiquity, making it difficult to erase evidence once it
has been publicized, the chance survivals of medieval materials allow room for
deliberate plotting and sinister machinations. As a result, the authors claim
that Dagobert II, a Merovingian king assassinated in 679, was the victim of
historiographical foul play as well as murder. They argue that “At some point
during the Middle Ages, a systematic attempt was apparently made to erase
Dagobert from history, to deny that he ever existed” (Baigent et al. 258). What
is more, “not until 1655 was Dagobert II reinstated in accepted lists of French
kings” (Baigent et al. 258). Clearly, such an erasure could only be explained
by “vested interests [who] had something of import to lose” if the full story
of Dagobert’s assassination and the survival of his bloodline became public
knowledge (Baigent et al. 258). In similar fashion, the authors are convinced
that the accepted accounts of the Templars, the accounts offered by respected
and responsible historians … not only collapsed under scrutiny,
but suggested some sort of “cover-up.” We could not escape the suspicion
that something had been deliberately concealed and a “cover story”
manufactured, which later historians had merely repeated (Baigent et al. 65).
These references work
to suggest the diffuse agency of conspiracy in motion: somebody obscures
something because somebody has something to lose. We might be inclined to see
this erasure as a metaphor for ideology in action, a figure for the effects of
medieval realpolitik or the mundane valuations that tend to render certain
historical subjects invisible while insuring the hypervisibility of others.
For Baigent, Lincoln,
and Leigh there is in fact little to choose between conspiracy theory as a
metaphor for ideology and conspiracy as a historical fact. From their point of
view, ideology often is conspiracy. "Something" and "someone"
point to moments of textual resistance, in which the ideological conspiracy of
early medieval historians, seconded by their modern heirs, works to frustrate
the decoding methods of the authors.
But this resistance
proves to be enabling rather than crippling, it allows
the work of historiographical narrative to move forward by opening a space for
imagination, in which someone and something are suggestive rather than
definitive. Of course, critics of alternative history argue that the authors
preserve such spaces of undecidability in bad faith, as a cover for the
advancement of spurious historical claims.
But someone and
something, if we pay attention to them, also have something to tell us about
the work of historical reconstruction, about the narrative tropes that
structure it, and about the uncertainties that drive history's narratives
forward at least as often as they hold them back. The space of
historiographical resistance, in other words, can be an enabling space almost
as easily as it can frustrate reconstruction altogether.
The authors apply a
similar method to their reading of grail legends (they refer to them as legends
rather than "romances"), searching out and exposing moments of
deliberate historical erasure. They argue that stories about the grail were
coded carriers of a message more profound than Christian doctrine, preserving
heretical and dangerous knowledge under cover of fantasy into the modern
period. Here, as elsewhere, things are not what they appear to be. Baigent,
Leigh, and Lincoln imply that Chrétien de Troyes may have said too much in his
last romance, "The Story of the Grail, or Perceval":
Chrétien himself died
around 1188, quite possibly before he could complete his work; and even if he
did complete it no copy has survived. If such a copy ever existed, it may well
have been destroyed in a fire at Troyes in 1188. The point need not be labored,
but certain scholars have found this fire, coinciding as it did with the poet’s
death, vaguely suspicious (Baigent et al. 288).
These “certain
scholars” are never named, but the claim that the romancer's death “around”
1188 coincides with a mysterious fire of that date is hedged about with
conditional phrases, Chrétien’s work was "quite possibly"
interrupted; if a manuscript were produced," “it may well have been
destroyed." Alternative historians frequently leave open such conditional
constructions, reminding us that they view their work as a hypothesis, a
theory, rather than an established fact. What is most important about this passage,
however, is its preoccupation with a vanished text, the final lines of a
manuscript that may or may not have existed, and may
or may not have held a crucial clue to the substance of Chrétien's work. The
authors are preoccupied with written evidence of all kinds, but inaccessible
texts, coded messages, and lost documents are especially critical for them.
These absent documents testify to history’s mutilation; they are witnesses to
the unspoken crime that drives the investigation. Embedded in this discussion
of medieval texts is the theme of conspiracy as an act of deliberate erasure,
implied by the “vaguely suspicious” circumstances of Chrétien’s death and the
unknown fate of his text. Medieval romances are alleged to carry coded messages
that testify to the existence of the double conspiracy, both the conspiracy to
preserve "heretical" knowledge, and the conspiracy to eradicate it.
Secret or
hypothetical texts further testify to the critical importance of the legend
that dominant powers attempted to erase, according to Baigent, Lincoln, and
Leigh. After Chrétien’s romances were written, the grail legend spread through
western Europe like a brush fire. At the same time, however, modern experts on
the subject agree that the later Grail romances do not seem to have derived
wholly from Chrétien, but seem to have drawn on at
least one other source as well, a source that in all probability predated
Chrétien. And during its proliferation the Grail story became much more closely
linked with King Arthur … And it also became linked with Jesus (Baigent et al.
288).
Another hidden text
is at work behind the partial, perhaps amputated, text of Chrétien’s grail
romance. The unnamed “modern experts” are possibly careworn linguists of
another generation, speculating about the descent and relations among
manuscripts. The authors may also be referring indirectly to the work of R.S.
Loomis, a prolific writer working in the first half of the twentieth century
whose work they cite elsewhere, a scholar who made large claims for the Celtic origins of Arthurian stories. Whatever the
case, those moth-eaten scholarly hypotheses have been concentrated and
distilled into the tantalizing possibility of a secret mother-text laden with
portentous inside knowledge.
In Richard Barber’s
study The Holy Grail: Imagination and Belief (Harvard University Press, 2004),
the work of Loomis is briefly summarized as:
“The archetypal Celtic enthusiast among the twentieth-century scholars was R.S.
Loomis, hugely diligent and learned, who elaborated the parallels already
established by earlier writers. But in the end, his zeal for Celtic origins
outran the material on which he was working, and his arguments rely on a series
of assumptions and analogues which scarcely hang together” (245). Barber places
him in the tradition of the Cambridge school of myth criticism pioneered by Alfred Nutt, and reminds his readers that the Cambridge
scholars tended to emphasize in their readings that "normality is the
pagan past, Christianity the aberration" (244). This emphasis on the pagan
past is the major source of their interest for alternative historians.
The story that
“spread through western Europe like a brush fire,” the story that may or may
not have gotten poor old Chrétien killed, takes on an amorphous new life,
floating behind the scenes and holding out the promise of answers only hinted
at in Chrétien's other texts. These romances are integrally linked to
"progressive" aspects of high culture in the period. In Holy Blood,
Holy Grail, the elegant world of the troubadours represents all that is fine
and good about the society of southern France, but in larger terms the courtly
world of medieval aristocratic readerships across Europe represents the only
hope for rescuing this warlike, patriarchal society from its own darkest self.
In this view, the softening influence of coded literary representations eventually
forces a shift in the culture's conception of itself. This is powerful
literature indeed. The source text has been successfully erased from the
historical record, according to the authors, yet the popularity of Chrétien's
stories suggests that the agencies of the subdominant conspiracy have managed
to keep their message alive. The survival of the coded text operates as proof
of the conspiratorial agency in action. These legends allegedly offer a secret
relationship to the past for modern interpreters and once offered the
rebellious few of the Middle Ages a special relationship to
one another. Nonconformists, heretics, and those who carry the secret knowledge
of Christ's bloodline allegedly share in a secret line of communication.
Baigent and Leigh
often return to the theme that legends contain some kernel of historical truth,
the residue of some lost (or obliterated) folk knowledge. Alongside the
censorship of the Middle Ages, then, there are also the “shadowy vestiges” of
another truth that has "slipped through the curtain drawn across the past”
(Baigent et al. 234).
From such legendary
“vestiges,” the coded folk wisdom of ancient informants, “a reality could be
reconstructed, a reality of a most interesting kind and one very discordant
with the tenets of orthodoxy” (Baigent et al. 234). When confronted with the
myth of origins attached to the Merovingian line, in which the first king was
supposed to have been born of a sea creature, the authors remark that such
“fantastic legends,” while common, “are not entirely imaginary, but symbolic or
allegorical, masking some concrete historical fact behind their fabulous
façade” (Baigent et al. 235).
Thus the sea beast becomes a man from beyond the sea, and
a reference to the Merovingian descent from Christ. This hermeneutic method
manages to be literal and fantastic at the same time, as the fantastic stories
prove to be in some sense literally true, and are
therefore doubly provocative. This reading also implies an intriguing
anthropology of the past, one that bears an uncomfortable resemblance to the
history of academic analysis of these early romances. The history of scholarly
debate over the concept of courtly love, a concept first proposed in relation
to Chrétien's work, in fact, is a story of colorful speculations rivaling (and
in some cases inspiring) the work of alternative historians.
Roger Boase
summarized these theories of origins in 1977 with labels quite as turgid as the
theories themselves: Hispano-Arabic, Chivalric-Matriarchal, Crypto-Cathar,
Neoplatonic, Bernardine-Marianist, Spring Folk Ritual, and Feudal-Sociological.
(See also Sarah Kay, "Courts, Clerks, and Courtly Love," in Roberta
Krueger, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Medieval Romance, Cambridge University
Press, 2000, 81-96).
Yet the major
questions driving older interpretive schemes are much the same questions that
drive both academic and popular speculation now, whether romances describe
spiritual themes that are compatible with Christian doctrinal understanding,
and what sort of relationship (or not) may have existed between
"real" life and the practices described in such stories, particularly
where sexual relations are concerned. In Holy Blood, Holy Grail the medieval
world becomes capable of accounting for itself, of remembering its own history,
only through the vehicle of “historical reality eclipsed by legend” (Baigent et
al. 235). In fact this characterization is not
so far removed from academic models for dealing with similar evidence.
Underwriting these specific issues of interpretation is a more far-reaching
disciplinary problem. How do medieval texts (especially literary ones, but not
only these) reflect the world around them? How can we trace the largely
anonymous agencies that produced such texts, and how can we go about isolating
or understanding the voices of those who might have rebelled against the
dominant ideology of their moment?
While idea of radical agency advanced in Holy Blood, Holy Grail
flies in the face of historicist practice in Medieval Studies, the idea of a
diffuse corporate agency driven forward by the work of subjects who are both
self-conscious and unconstrained speaks to the repressed desires of anecdotalism.
Anecdotalism offers a form of argument in which anomalies, strange
exempla, and cryptic gestures from the historical
record are strung together to form the "nodes" of a narrative that is
paradoxically singular and representative at the same time. In
light of the various critiques advanced against new historicism in
recent years, it is also worth reemphasizing its traditional commitment to the
contextualization of specifically literary practice,
and its resulting uncomfortable position somewhere between the disciplines of
literary analysis and history. Critics of such historicist
methods have tended to suggest that this approach is both insufficiently
explanatory (in other words, too idiosyncratic, too local, disrupting history's
work rather than enriching it) and too "literary" in its commitments,
emphasizing virtuoso acts of interpretation over the development of a
thorough-going analytical framework.
The
discomfort with such
historicism arises from the ways in which its commitment to the anecdote not
only raises the specter of historiography's narrativity, but also points to the
self-generating, even deterministic overtones of the work of interpretation
itself, which reads every textual fragment as saturated with the potential for
deeper meaning. Part of what is precisely "literary" about the work
of new historicism, in other words, is its commitment to this supersaturation,
the multiplicity and dense overdetermination, of history's narrative work.
Alternative history showcases whit a similar "conspiracist" capacity
of narrative, but more importantly acts out new historicism's frustrated desire
to access "the real" of historical experience outside the constraints
of historical contingencies. In other words, alternative history's radically
free subject is new historicism's object of desire. (See Sonja Laden,
Recuperating the Archive: Anecdotal Evidence and Questions of 'Historical Realism,'"
Poetics Today 25:1, 2004: 1-28).
The strategic use of
the anecdote is a crucial tool of argument in new historicist writing, and is
closely associated with its more "literary" maneuvers of interpretation.The anecdote in fact appears to be
intended, to disrupt smooth explanatory narratives and rob them of their
illusions of sufficiency, while it stages a confrontation with the
"radical strangeness" of the past meant to provoke an understanding
of past reality as contingency. Thus the link between
the strange and the real is not accidental, it is a link that drives such
historicism to excavate anecdotal anomalies, and is implicated in complex ways
in an interest in literary forms and symbolic gestures.
Sonja Laden argues
that anecdotes create a necessarily false sense of
authenticity by hiding their role in the work of reconstruction behind the
screen of direct testimony or access (8-16). By encouraging an illusion of
direct access to the "real" unfolding of historical events, anecdotes
also effectively secure for the historian a status approaching that of an
eyewitness. In fact ‚anecdote’produces
the effect of the real, the occurrence of contingency, and uniquely“ lets
history happen by virtue of the way it introduces an opening into the
teleological. „
Books like Holy Blood, Holy Grail use anecdotal evidence in ways that are
precisely similar to those of new historicism, to
point to anomalies, produce a reality effect, and quietly hint at all that
"might have been." Such a perspective instantiates an ethics of obligation to the dead, which encourages us to
engage in the ritual of searching for their messages to us across time. Most
importantly, the reality effect thus generated evokes rather than decides the
issues for us, alternative history insists on its status as hypothesis, as
theory, and confirms its own undecidability in the very midst of its grandest
interpretive gestures. Alternative history also does what new history writers
cannot do, but can only wish for or dream about: it
recuperates radically free subjects who resist the oppressions and depredations
of power and yet get away with it, subjects who nudge and wink from the margins
of history without, however, paying the price of containment. If we gave
ourselves free rein to collude with the dead, would we not wish to generate
just such a conspiracy?
In fact
also Lynn Picknett and Clive Price believe
that tracing the descent of these continuities should have been a paradigm for
the writing of history itself in the face of the terrifying meaninglessness of
a disordered past. For example their The Templar
Revelation begins with a series of investigative vignettes, opening with a
discussion of the alleged hidden symbolism behind some of Leonardo da Vinci’s
most famous works. From there, the authors move on to a tour of the
twentieth-century church just off Leicester Square in London, Notre-Dame de
France. The building was designed and partly decorated by Jean Cocteau, and Picknett and Prince claim it is linked to Leonardo’s
paintings via a common symbolism drawn from an “underground tradition” (Picknett and Prince 48) of secret knowledge and
spirituality. From London, the narrative travels to southern France, where the
authors discuss the medieval legends and sites associated with Mary Magdalene
in the region, once again arguing for a link between these sites, Leonardo, and
Cocteau’s church, citing references to the same set of complex symbols. Soon
the authors introduce us to the Cathars, the thirteenth-century heretics of
southern France who were obliterated by the methods of inquisition and crusade.
This leads to the hermeticists of the Renaissance,
and finally the early history of Freemasonry in Europe. Along the way, we learn
about a secret organization, the Priory of Sion, which has allegedly kept the confidences of all these loose cadres of freethinkers,
and has possibly even directed their actions. But once we have followed
this chronology up to the present, perhaps thinking we are back in the grip of
linear time once more, we take a sharp right into the Biblical period for the
remainder of the book, where the roots of this secret knowledge, and an
alternative religion based on the teachings of John the Baptist, first became
known.
Like many other
alternative histories, the Revelation tackles an enormous span of Western
history, but to say that this sweep extends “from” the Biblical period “to”the present is obviously
misleading. Instead, like many books in the genre, this textmoves
by fits and starts, ranging backward and forward over the formidable
territory of the past according to a logic of space rather than
linearity. Reading the Revelation, one might be forgiven for thinking that
history exists on a flat plane or in a very large room, where it is possible to
browse among its contents as one would the products in a Salvation Army shop.
The “underground stream” of hidden knowledge sounds a lot like old-fashioned
triumphalism dressed up in new clothes, where the progress of European culture
and even world hegemony are made more enticing by virtue of being viewed
through the eyes of freethinkers and outsiders.
Given the genre's
penchant for questioning or undermining academic history's narrative methods,
it is perhaps not surprising to find the assumptions of linearity itself called into question. But more importantly the
Revelation asks us to imagine history as a meaningful whole, and this narrative
technique is a way of theorizing about patterns in our culture, rather than
viewing history as a set of disparate, discrete narratives about the past. (See
also Amy Elias, Sublime Desire: History and Post-1960s Fiction, 2001).
Because of its
historical influence, Picknett and Prince understand
Christianity as the tradition responsible for founding a Western order of
civilization that generates both global capital and global injustice. However,
because the “underground tradition” is also supposed to have included some of the
West’s iconic thinkers, men like Leonardo, Isaac Newton, and Victor Hugo, it is
also paradoxically a motive force behind the development of Western culture,
making positive contributions to it, as if from behind a veil.
They describe the
Cathar heretics of the thirteenth century as one group whose influence and
insights long outlasted their existence as an identifiable religious culture,
and they do this, in part, by reviewing the history of the heresy itself. The
picture they present of the Languedoc-Rousillon
region of France is by now a traditional one among alternative historians: In
the eleventh and twelfth centuries this area was the envy of Europe for its
civilization and culture. Its art, literature and science were by far the most
advanced of the day—but in the thirteenth century this brilliant and glittering
culture was ripped apart by an invasion from the barbaric north, causing a
simmering resentment that persists to this day. Many of the inhabitants still
prefer to regard the land as Occitania, its former
name. It is, as we were to find, a region with a particularly long memory (Picknett and Prince 85).
This “barbaric”
invasion, destroying what it would not understand, remains the “single fact of
history that has been responsible for the systematic impoverishment of the
area” (Picknett and Prince 84), while the region’s
long memory is matched by an equallydistinct cultural
identity. The “old Languedoc,” we are told, “has always been a heartland for
heretical and unorthodox ideas, probably because a culture that encourages the
pursuit of knowledge tends to tolerate radical new thought” (Picknett and Prince 85). The links between the modern world
and the bloody history of Cathar persecution are cemented by references that no
contemporary reader would overlook: “The Languedoc saw the first act of
European genocide,” a series of horrific acts which pre-figured “more modern
holocausts” (Picknett and Prince 85). The intent here
seems to be prefiguration rather than comparison, and the text already gestures
toward its own prescriptive function: if history had developed as it should
have done, and if we had understood its lessons as we should have, then the
Holocaust would never have happened.
After painting the
contemporary countryside of southern France as a landscape of devastation, Picknett and Prince go on to describe the horrors of the
Cathar persecution itself. Here we encounter the townspeople of Béziers, who in 1209 refused the crusaders’ demands to turn
over the Cathar residents of the town, despite the certain knowledge they would
be killed for their efforts (Picknett and Prince 87).
These heretics and sympathizers were duly put to death on the feast day of Mary
Magdalene, the 22 of July, their fates allegedly sealed with the infamous
dictum, “Kill them all. God will know his own” (Picknett
and Prince 88).
After this, the
campaign “proceeded with the utmost brutality, as city after city fell to the
soldiers” and the length of the conflict offered “a not inconsiderable period
for the crusaders to do their very worst” (Picknett
and Prince 90). Finally the doomed heretics were left
with one last major refuge, the imposing fortress of Montségur,
built on the “dizzying heights of a craggy mountain” (Picknett
and Prince 91). Once again, the authors employ some familiar tropes of the
legendary history of the Cathars: we learn that some of the crusading soldiers
so admired the heretics they defected to the besieged fortress, and that those
inside the walls requested a mysterious fifteen-day reprieve before
surrendering to crusading forces, during which time they were supposed to have
smuggled out a socalled “Cathar treasure” in the dead
of night (Picknett and Prince 91-92).
Picknett and Prince also suggest that the Cathars knew some
“trance technique” that allowed them to transcend physical pain, since they
allegedly “approached their certain death by torture not only with stoicism,
but with total calm, even, it is said, when the flames actually began to lap
around them” (Picknett and Prince 92). In this
context, they recall the “haunting image,” remembered from the 1970’s, of a
Buddhist monk immolating himself to protest the conflict in Vietnam (Picknett and Prince 92).
In the Revelation,
these medieval episodes of inhumanity together act as a crucial link in the
transmission of enlightened, heretical knowledge between ancient and modern
worlds. Here the Middle Ages appear in a classic role, as the great “middle” of
Western civilization. But for alternative historians, the medieval is more than
just a way station, a dark and barbaric stop on the way to the modern. Instead the medieval prefigures the modern, and acts as the
glue that holds Western history together. Thus it is
always a quick two-step back to the medieval in alternative historical
accounts, whether we are approaching from the ancient world, linking antique
traditions to medieval Christianity, or moving backward from the present,
suggesting that medieval organizations, beliefs, and events continue to have a
profound influence on the contemporary world. For Picknett
and Prince, the Cathars occupy this middle comfortably. The authors assert that
the Cathars were the descendents of the Bogomil
heretics of the tenth century, and that the Bogomils were the heirs of a
variety of dualism borrowed from the ancient world. This comes only a few pages
after their suggestion that, “No-one can, with any accuracy, pinpoint the
genesis of the Cathar faith” (Picknett and Prince 93
and 89, respectively). The so-called “Cathar faith” was “a local tradition
[with] almost unique power over the hearts and minds of the people,” and its
suppression, in turn, “caus[ed] scars so deep in the
collective psyche of the people [of southern France] that it is by no means
whimsical to detect them still” (Picknett and Prince
88-89).
Ancient dualists,
Bogomils, and Cathars, descend finally to the modern people of southern France,
and the proof of continuity between them is visible in the landscape itself:
what was “once the richest area of France, [is still] among its poorest” (Picknett and Prince 84).
Although some parts
of this history of the Cathars is true, alternative historians
ad their speculations about a “Cathar treasure,” and with a heightened sense of
drama, they are invoking a legendary history that has become the short-hand of
late-night speculations.
When Picknett and Prince add their conjectures about the
Cathars’ ability to transcend pain and their intimations of the long life of a
certain heretical “orientation” in the region, they are speaking to a stifled
impulse to martyrology, one that is not as fully expressed here as in some
other alternative historical texts. And yet in its depiction of the Cathars,
The Templar Revelation still suggests that this episode contains more than the
usual ethical import. In this history, it is unethical not to take sides just
because the events are removed from us in time. And the side we choose is
understood to imply something about our ethical status in the present, not
least because this is about more than a persecution; it is a “European
genocide,” a “holocaust” (Picknett and Prince 85).
And when Picknett and Prince claim that Cathar beliefs were
inherited from or somehow transmitted by the earlier Bogomil heretics who dwelt
in the Balkans, and that this group, in turn, were the recipients of Manichaean
religious ideas of late antiquity they are repeating a general claim stemming
from medieval intellectuals.
Worse, like we detailed in Part three of our case study
above, the very word ‘Cathar’ is itself an illusion produced by a desire to
discover an organized heretical ‘church,’ complete with an ecclesiastical
hierarchy including bishops.
Like
Mark Pegg pointed out earlier,the
word was never used by these heretics themselves, who referred to one another
in the surviving records as “good men” and “good women,” terms also used
(rather inconveniently) as simple polite forms of address in these rural
communities. In the surviving records from one particularly large inquisition,
involving the examination of almost 6,000 men and women in 1245,not
only was ‘Cathar’ never uttered or an elaborate dualist theology ever
expounded, but no international heretical organization, no ‘Cathar Church,’ was
discovered … Nor will such an entity be unearthed by modern scholars—unless, of
course, hundreds of references to heretici and boni homines are persistently,
and rather unashamedly, translated as referring to ‘Cathars’.(Pegg,
“On Cathars, Albigenses, and good men of Languedoc,” Journal of Medieval
History 27.2/2001).
But this among other examples, points to the effects produced when scholarship is
influenced by powerful unconscious desires and assumptions. In this case, the
desire for a narrative of continuity is obvious, as is the need for easily
identifiable forces at work—heresy versus church, stubborn resistance of the
countryside versus the intrusive knowledge structures of the elite.
But just because
people in other times and places thought concepts which appear to be similar to concepts we know and understand, we cannot be
sure they thought those thoughts in the same way we think them, according to
the same logic, within the same contexts, or for the same reasons.
Thus we cannot say for sure why René d’Anjou
went hunting for the Magdalene’s bones, or to what extent piety or selfinterest were at work when Philip the Fair arrested the
Templars in France (Picknett and Prince 74-75 and 99,
respectively). But Picknett and Prince, like many
other alternative historians, figure this strangeness, this difference or
indecipherability, as the proof of a secret, the evidence that “something was
going on” (Picknett and Prince 105), including not
only a conspiracy to suppress the truth, but also a conspiracy on the part of
the secret tradition to preserve its independence and carefully amassed
insights.
But where current
academic history observes the boundaries of this opaque sphere,
alternative history reads a purpose in the silence, The Templar Revelation and and books following in its wake,ask
us to engage in a practice of ethical identification with the lost heretics of
southern France, and they suggest in their different ways that this
identification will serve as a method for overcoming the gap between past and
present. Thus for Picknett
and Prince, and most of the other alternative writers today, the medieval world
is continuous with the modern one in spite of its moments of illegibility.
If, like Picknett and Prince, we see history as a realm of
continuous returns, in which the usual evils emerge in every generation to
menace us, we may give up on political action. If in the extreme opposite, we
see each historical period as incommensurate with any other, we may cease to
believe we can learn anything from the past.
Picknett and Prince register their awareness of these
critiques indirectly in their concerns about mainstream history’s biases and
the conspiracies the past keeps from the present.
The "real"
source of the modern celebration in St. Maximin may have been forgotten, but
for Picknett and Prince the gestures and signs of the
contemporary ritual encode crucial clues about Europe's origins in the
ideological violence of early medieval Christian history.
Beginning with this
local relic, the authors of The Templar Revelation proceed to examine the
historical basis of legendary stories about the Magdalene,
and their narrative in this section of the book is a crucial index of the
philosophy of history operative throughout their work that acts like a wish fulfillment structure.
The Revelation's
impolitic argument for a universal "pagan" religious drive suggests that
we ought to ask what interpretive principle underwrites our sympathetic
identification with historical figures. At the same time, this alternative
history’s recourse to a grand oppositional narrative of Western culture exceeds
easy comparison with academic practice, and asks
impertinent questions about the commitments of scholarly methodology. In the
pages of The Templar Revelation, academic historiography's suspicion of
too-easy representations of the European past explodes into a full-blown
oppositional ethnography which deploys a skeptical reading of Christian legends
and rituals in order to suggest that Europe has never
been what it thinks it is.
This “something more”
is the residue of pagan practice which will be uncovered as The Templar
Revelation progresses, living on in disguise as devotion to the orthodox female
saint, Mary Magdalene. Picknett and Prince adopted
the familiar “two worlds” philosophy of history popularized in neopagan and
occult works, in which an ancient tradition of European goddess worship was
crippled by the rise of Christianity and its totalitarian vision of Western
culture. In additionn like many other alternative
historians today, they reveal a disposition toward Jungianism,
with its emphasis on archetypes and instinctual desires.
For updates
click homepage here