THE BELS, (BEYLS, BAILS, BALS, BAYLS, BEILLES) and

THE BELLE, (BAILLE, BAYLE, BEILLE)

IN THE PYRENEAN REGION.

Warning

The Bayles and Beyles nouns encountered in this Essay are all homonyms, variants of the core patronymics Bels-Belle from Flanders.

However, the reader must know that, during some times in ancient West European history, the Occitan’s terms: Bayle, Bailes, Bailes, Bailles, Baylies, etc., were also nouns given to people sharing some responsibilities inside a local net of territorial administration.

The caution is appropriate especially since the term is particularly polysemous in Medieval Latin. Specialized dictionaries list about fifteen meanings of the word.

The medieval lands fiscal and tax divisions were based upon the “Baillies”. In Flanders, the Counts appointed similar bailiffs (baljuw in Flemish). In the south of France, the equivalent agent was called “Sénéschal”. In England, they were known as “Sheriffs”. They may have been agents of the Seigneurial taking whose origin is lost in the mists of time. The term and its variants were used in France and adjacent countries for centuries.

The administrative functions of these “Baillies” were much more elaborated than the old “Leudes” and “Vassi”, we will develop subsequently. If these latest terms do not cause confusion, the situation is quite different with the “Bayles” and “Beyles”.

For the noun “Bayles” and Co encountered in the texts, it is the context that will inform us on the word’s meaning. For example: “...To the Bayles (administrative function), ranking under the Baillies, were given some juridical charges...”. In this case, it is quite evident that we are dealing with administrative agents and their functions and not with homonyms of the Bels-Belle Lineage.

Another indication of the Bayle(s) (Baillies) in the sense of administrative agents is that in the texts referring to them, they are virtually always followed by the preposition “de” or “of - from” in English, linking them to their authority. So is it that in the Cathars` region we meet the Bayles of the count of Toulouse, Giraut Durant, the Bayles of Raimon VII, the Bayle of Avignonet, Raimon de Alfaro, the Baillis of the king Louis IX, etc.

But what about the word “Les Bayles” standing alone, such as in the name of a locality or of a hamlet? How can one know, indeed, if the encountered noun “Bayles” signifies an administrative function or a patronymic?

In Flanders, where the noun originates from, the problem does not arise. There it is quite evident that the Bayles and Co are homonyms and synonyms of the patronymics Bels and Belle. The real problem is encountered mostly southern France that belonged for wide areas, to the Lineage of the Counts of Barcelona.

During the “Ancien Regime”, in France, the “Baillies” were responsible, in their Baillages, for the application of justice and control of the administration and local finances. The “Bailli” comes from the Latin term “baiulare” himself derived from the Latin verbs “bajulo (baiulo) and bajulus (baiulus)”, to carry, to watch, to keep, to guard.

Note: The “Ancien Regime” (1589-1789) was an absolutist political and social system of France under the Dynasty of the Bourbons, prior to the French Revolution. Under the regime, everyone was a subject of the king of France as well as a member of an estate and province. All rights and status flowed from the social institutions, divided into three orders: clergy, nobility, and others (the Third Estate). King Louis XIV of France was the last King of the House of the Bourbon. With him died the Ancien Regime.

During the Middle Ages, the Baillies (Bels) had only administrative functions. They were scribes, accountants, translators, witnesses, lawmen and notaries. The Catalan Counts (Counts of Barcelona) institutionalised them by the end of the VIIth century.

We may not totally exclude the possibility that some mentions of “Bayles” in the southwest of France, the area where our dynasts (members of our Dynasty) were very active, may also refer to those administrative functions. However, with a little common sense, it will be rather easy to separate both nouns by their meaning in the context!

In south-western France, most of the “Bayles” and variants are clearly patronymics. For instance, the nouns of Sybille Bayls (Bayles, Beyls, Baills, etc.) and her son Pons “Bayle”, we will develop later, are real patronymics as they were and still are in Flanders! In these cases, the word “Bayles” and variants have absolutely nothing to do with an administrative function.

This is also true for the denominations of some isolated hamlets or localities, in the Pyrenean region. The two localities (Lieu-dit) close to each other: The “Les Bels” and the “Les Bayles”, northeast of Massat, are definitively toponyms based upon patronymics. The occurrence is like the Barnard Castle (the name of the castle and of the village), of the north of England, whose denomination was given after the name of the builder of the castle, Bernard I of Balliol (Rainald´s son), in the late XIth century!

After my visit to Madame the mayor of Boussenac, I drove to the village’s cemetery, which is in Massat (687 inhabitants). It is there where the people of - Les Bels - were/are buried. The - Les Bayles - were/are buried in another village! In Massat, I noticed the gravestone of “Jean et Jeanne Piquemal-Bel” and on a family vault, the engraving: “Famille Loubet-del Bayle”.

The “del Bayle” is the literal translation in Spanish of the Flemish patronymic “van Belle” or its French version “de Belle”. They are synonyms. As in the Middle Ages this area used to belong to Spain, it is therefore not surprising to encounter some Spanishified (sic) patronymics. Today, the border between France and Spain runs through the Pyrenean Mountain range, at some 20 km distance as the crow flies from the “Massat-Boussenac” area.

This gravestone and vault indications prove us that, in this region, the words “Bel” are not necessary adjectives and that the words “Bayle” do not systematically refer to administrative functions. These are patronymics, real family names identical to the “Madame Bails” described in the subsequent sub-Chapter “La Bastide”. The “Madame Bails” is, in this case, also a real patronymic that must be differentiated from the woman’s administrative function: “Madame the administrative”!

The fact that our lineages had no “business” in the southeast of France saves us many identification problems. From the early Middle Ages on, the major European theatre of operations, to which our Knights were always present, was precisely in the southwest of France. The Pyrenées region happened to be the hot spot of all the big events from the times of the Visigoths, Merovingians, Redae, Carolingians, Moslems, Carolingians, Capetians, Counts of Barcelona, Kings of Aragon, Crusades, Cathars, Templars, etc. And the core of this regional hot spot was Rennes-le-Château!

Unquote.

I found in historical books the confirmation of the presence, in southern France, of another Flemish family belonging to our Dynasty: the Baille (also Bayle). The time of their settlement is unsure, but they were in the region since at least ca. anno 1250. The text wherein they are mentioned describes the arrest of the last Languedoc Cathar Perfect, William Bélibaste. Arrested and quick sentenced, he was burned, on 24 July 1321, in the courtyard of the castle at Villerouge-Termenès.

Bélibaste arrest was made possible owing to the treason of a certain Arnold Sicre. His mother, Sybile Bayls (Beyls, Baills, etc.) and his brother Pons* Bayle (Baille), were also arrested and executed by the Inquisition. Arnold´s family was living in Ax-les-Thermes, a small village (counting some 1400 inhabitants in 2010) embedded in the Pyrenean Mountain range and surrounded by peaks reaching over 2100 meters.

As we have seen previously, the very last “Parfait”, William Bélibaste, was burned in 1321. After him breaks the long unbroken chain of “Parfaits”. Therefore, was this betrayal not simply one more to add to the long list, it was the most serious of consequences. It signed the death sentence of Catharism! Without the "Cathar Filiation", the transmission from a Parfait to a Parfait, Catharism was destined for definitive extinction.

It is like in the world of the Traditional Chivalry where only one knight can dub another. If the last knight were to fail, there could be no more chivalrous armaments. The "Chivalrous Filiation", also called "the Fountain of Honour", being definitively interrupted, there can be no more armament and consequently, no more knights!

Note that, in the Pyrenees region, the word “Pons” can be either a Christian name, such as Pons Bayle (Baille) we just met, or a family name as in the medieval city of Illes-sur-Tet where a fountain is named after Jean-Sebastien Pons! The word “Pons” (Latin Poncius) sometime also written “Ponce” - “Poncio”, was already used as a proper noun in 1176. Source: Conversation with Mr Sanchaise from Ille-sur-Tet (July 2016).

Archives inform us of: "Pons Roger and some girls of Fanjeaux”. These were the only people converted to Christianity by the monk Dominique Guzman (the future St. Dominic).

 «…Arnaud Baille/Sicre, in the Comté de Foix, in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth century. We know several details about his life through the Fournier Register, and Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie's analysis of those records. Raised in Ax-les-Thermes, Arnaud was the son of Arnaud Sicre, senior, a notary, and Sybille Baille (also Bayle). His father was a Catholic and worked as a writer for the Church. His mother, however, was a firm Cathar. The marriage did not last, and Sybille forced her husband out of the house. Sybille readopted her maiden name, while Arnaud and his brother Bernard [or was it Pons?], would alternate between surnames, sometimes using both. At the age of seven Arnaud was sent to live with his father in Tarascon so that he could be educated.

His mother's heresy was uncovered by the Inquisition. Sybille was arrested and burned at the stake after relapsing into Catharism. The family's property was confiscated. This left Arnaud embittered, as his mother's heresy had cost him his inheritance. He became an itinerant cobbler.

In an attempt to win back the family home, Arnaud, a notary, decided on becoming an informer for the Inquisition. He was sent to Catalonia where several Cathars exiles were in hiding. Arnaud joined this group and eventually convinced several of them to return to the Comté to attend his sister's wedding. Forces of the Inquisition were waiting, and several of the heretics were captured, including the “Parfait” William Bélibaste and the shepherd Pierre Maury…». Wikipedia/Le Roy Ladurie, Emmanuel (1978). Montaillou: The Promised Land of Error (sic). trans. Barbara Bray. New York: G. Braziller…”.

The Church, always on the lookout for power, viewed the growing number of denunciations very favorably. For, as we saw earlier, a denunciation meant not only the arrest of the alleged suspect, his or her swift arbitrary trial, but above all the appropriation of all his or her possessions.

According to the text, Arnold (Arnaud) Sicre, through an agreement made with Bishop Fournier, the Inquisitor of Pamiers, managed to recover the confiscated properties of his heretical (sic) mother and became a rich man! As said by Stephen O´Shea: “… Catholic orthodoxy had found in Arnold Sicre a champion of treachery…”.

It must have been a real “tour de force” for Arnaud to ensure the recovery of his property. The Church never hears well with this ear. If this time it worked, we must see it as the most beautiful proof of the capital importance of the capture of this last "perfect" Cathar still wandering around in nature.

The following text explains how Arnaud Sicre, by bargaining and treachery, managed to recover his properties confiscated by the Church, with, of course, its full complicity.

Procès verbal at Chapter Nr 65, out of the Register of Inquisition of Jacques Fournier (Bishop of Pamiers). Confession and deposition of Arnaud Sicre d'Ax on the charge of heresy.

“In the year of our Lord 1321, on the 21st of October, Arnaud Sicre d'Ax, having denounced, two years ago now, to Reverend Father in Christ monseigneur Jacques, by the grace of God, bishop of Pamiers, and to Brother Gaillard de Pomiès, of the order of Prêchetirs, of the convent of Pamiers, substitut of monseigneur the inquisitor, that he had found in the town of San Mateo in the diocese of Tortosa the heretic Guillaume Bélibaste, fugitive for heresy from the Wall of Carcassonne, as well as many other believers of the heretics of the diocese of Pamiers, fugitives for heresy;

the same Arnaud having spontaneously offered to capture, detain and bring the said heretic into the hands and power of the said lord bishop, which, he said, could only be done if he feigned and pretended to be a believer in the said heretic; monseigneur the bishop gave him power and authorization to pretend to be a believer in this heretic, to do and say whatever he told him, except to share his errors, in order to deceive him by pious fraud and to lead him willingly to the diocese of Pamiers or to some other place subject to the Count of Foix, and he gave him money to be able to accomplish what has just been said.

The aforementioned Arnaud faithfully carried out his mission. He seduced this heretic and brought him to the town of Tirvia in the diocese of Urgel, where he was arrested with him; they were then taken prisoner to Castelbôn in the same diocese, and the heretic, by order of our lord the pope, was returned to the Wall of Carcassonne from where he had fled, and the said Arnaud also brought him there with the people of my lord the inquisitor…”.

Here's a very brief overview of the Inquisition's modus operandi.

In the year 1184, Pope Lucius III issued a decree directing the state authorities to swear an oath to pursue heretics upon the request of the bishops. The beginning of the Inquisition was officially decided during the Synod of Toulouse in 1229. The papal legate, Cardinal Romanus, took over the presidency. He emphasized:

1. The bishops should oblige priests and laity to swear an oath to search for heretics.
2. All males from the age of 12 and all females from the age of 14 must swear to report heretics known to them.
   1. This oath shall be renewed every year.
   2. Anyone who does not confess three times a year is considered suspect of heresy.
3. The secular lords are ordered to destroy the dwellings of heretics.
4. Anyone who renounces heresy is to move to an orthodox village.

The Inquisition has been theoretically secured and consolidated from Boniface VIII (1294-1300) to Benedict XI (1303-1304) With Clement V (1305-1314), the events move on to the activities of the mendicant orders: from here the terror spreads across half of Europe. The mendicant orders had a special closeness to the people and were the best guarantors for such activities.

On May 15, 1252, Innocent IV issued the bull “ad extirpanda” ordering: “Anyone who finds a heretic may seize his property. His goods were to be confiscated and handed over to the bishop. The state must arrest all suspects, imprison them, hand them over to the bishop or inquisitor under safe conduct and pass sentence within 14 days. If they do not comply with this order, they will be excommunicated.”  Source: WOLF Hans-Jürgen. The pope also authorized officially the use of torture. Source: Théo.

An example how the Church worked:

Master Milo (the Notary of Innocent III and appointed as papal legate, was the subservient “instrument” of Arnau Amalric [abbot of Citeaux, archbishop and Duke* of Narbonne] to Provincia) wrote, in 1215, to Raimon VI, the count of Toulouse and ordered him to come to the city of Valence to hear the instructions of the abbot. The count, expecting such an invitation, dutifully arrived at Valence. He listened to the abbatial mandates and promised to follow all of them.

* It should be noted that this Almaric ennobled himself with the title of Duke of Narbonne. Of course, no challenge was possible without running the risk of being falsely accused of "cooperating" with the Albigensians or "supporting" the Cathars, whose ends would have been the same.

Milo distrustful and wary of such committal contribution, required Raimon VI to hand over seven fortified villages to the Church as a pledge of good faith and future obedience. The count did as he was told. These “castra” were Roquemaure, Fourques, Oppède, Mornas, Beaumes de Venise, Montferand and Largentière. Milo ordered the count to relinquish to the Church all the county of Melgueil as well.

Milo had yet another perfidious means in his possession. He demanded (ordered) that the consuls of Avignon, Nimes, Orange, Montpellier, Vallence, Saint-Gilles, and numerous other cities swear oaths that if the count went against the dictates of the abbot, then, instantly, all ties of homage and fealty to the count were severed. The hold of the Church was of a totalitarian type. There was no way to escape the omnipotence of Jesus' faithful and treacherous soldiers. From the simple villein to the emperor, all were under the total control of the Church.

Peter Authié (Autier), from Montségur, was the last but one ”Parfait” Cathar. He was captured and burned in April 1310 in front of the cathedral of Toulouse. (See 9 paragraphs below).

Arnold Sicre-Bayle family were aristocrats of this part of the South of France. Arnold was known as a wealthy notary. He must have had very frequent contacts with another also wealthy notary of Ax-les-Thermes, Pierre Authié (+1310) or Peter Autier. Their offices were in the same city at the same time.

“…Peter Autier (c 1245-1310): Cathar holy man. Until middle age a wealthy notary in the mountain town of Ax-les-Thermes, Autier received heretical religious instruction in Italy and returned to Languedoc to spread the faith…”. Source: Stephen O´Shea.

Incidentally, at the time of Bérenger Saunière, the Abbé of the Parish of Bugarach (another very controversial place close to Rennes-le-Château) was also a … Sicre! The Abbé is this linked to our Dynasty, although a little more than 500 years ago!

The Abbés Sicre, Saunière as well as Boudet and Gélis, are reported in the list of the “Archiprêtres du Doyenné de Couiza” or “Archpriests of the Deanery of Couiza”. Sicre is reported in 1868, Saunière in 1885. In those times, the Parish of Bugarach counted 600 souls. Rennes-le-Château only 298.

There is no doubt that Sybille Baille (Bayle) belongs to the family of the Baille(s) from the South of France. Such as Pierre Bayle, born in Carla-Bayle (see Chapter I-d, under 1647) must be a remote heir of these Baille (Bayle) from Ax-les-Thermes. The geographical proximity of both places, Carla-Bayle and Ax-les-Thermes (some 74 km), support this assertion!

It is also interesting to note that west of Ax-les-Thermes, there is a highland called the Plateau de Beille, a toponym based upon the Flemish patronymic of the Baille family of Ax-les-Thermes. Today, the Plateau is an important ski resort. The winter sports station, called “Station de Beille”, lies at a height of 1,790 metres. It was evidently called after the name of the Plateau! Southwest of Ax, there is, known for centuries, a mountain pass called: le Col de Beil (Baille).

The first division French Montpellier Hérault Soccer Club has a former player that is today (2013 and since 2009) the club’s alternate trainer, working together with the Mr René Girard. His name is Pascal Baills. His patronymic is derived from Bels, the source of several variants such as Bayls, Bailles, Beilles, etc. Reading a few lines about him, I discovered these interesting words:

“…Ce Catalan d'origine au sang chaud…“ or “…This hot blood of Catalan origin…”. The origin of this person is hence definitively from Catalonia, which is exactly the region of the appearances of all these patronymics and toponyms. Another coincidence? What the magazine reporter of course does not know is that the far away origin of Pascal Baills is not Catalonia but Flanders! Exactly the same amalgam happened for the pseudo-Norman Scottish Balliols!

Also interesting is the fact that William Bélibaste, the last Cathar Perfect, was brought to the castle of Villerouge-Termenès. As we have seen already, this castle lies, as the crow flies, only 18 km east of Villardebelle and 21 km from Belcastel-et-Buc. The Lord of that castle was thus a neighbour of the Belle Lords, as the “Counts of Flanders” and the “Merovingians” were our neighbours in Flanders, and the Belle from Belcastel-et-Buc were neighbours from Bertrand de Blanchefort near Rennes-le-Château! Other coincidences?

But there is more to it. In Flanders, we have encountered the link existing, for centuries, between the Bels (Belle) - The Counts of Flanders - The Merovingians. Now, it happens that we find exactly the shadow of this link, in the South of France with Belcastel-et-Buc, Lyderic, the Grand Forester and the Merovingians.

The “BUC” appellation.

We will now take a closer look at this Lyderic, called the “Buc” because he is the person who may give us a hint on the origin of this "Buc" appellation.

History tells us that an evil lord named Phinaert, Prince of Buc (also Buck or Bucq) and chancellor of the castle of the same name, once a Roman citadel, killed Salwart, Lyderic's father, on his way with his wife and child through the “Forest sans Merci “. Note: that the castle is said to have been at the same place where the bridge of Phin is in the city of Lille.

The history of Lyderic I contains facts that are wrapped in legends. But legends may never be underestimated. They all have a basis of truth. It is thanks to them that historical facts have survived the ups and downs of history and have come down to us by oral means for want of other means. The two main ones are the following:

1. Around the year 620, the prince of Dijon, Salvaert, travels to the Kingdom of England with his pregnant wife, Ermengaert. On their way to Flanders, they are ambushed by the local lord, the giant Phinaert. He has the prince, and his men murdered, while Ermengaert flees and finds refuge with a hermit in the forest. She gives birth to a son, whom she entrusts to him near the Fontaine del Saulx, which gave its name to a street and a passage in Lille. The hermit feeds the child with deer's milk, brings him up, and baptizes him with his own name: Lyderic.

2. Another version tells us that Lyderic’s mother Ermengarde (Princess of Dijon), during the ambush, miraculously succeeded to hide her son in a bush that grew near a fountain called "le Saulx", because of the large willows that shaded it.

Lyderic the infant, given the urgency of the situation, was thrown at arm's length by his mother rather than placed carefully in a bush. A hermit who lived in a cave, which must have been close to the bush, found the infant and cared for him for almost 18 years. Lyderic, having learned of the events that had befallen his father and mother, decided to take revenge on Phinaert and free his mother, who was still in captivity in the Castle of Buc.

At this point in our story, two inconsistencies should be noted. The texts state that the Hermit who sheltered Lyderic, lived in a cave or a cavern. The other relates that there was yet another cave under a rock called “the Weeping Rock”. The problem is that in Flanders, not far from Lille and close to the source of "del Saulx", there are no rocks nor caves. We do not find these geological formations in tertiary and quaternary layers, i.e. polders and sandy-silted soil.

Caves, caverns, and other cavities, are the product of water erosion in limestone and these are only found, as far as Belgium is concerned, east of the Meuse River, and around the rivers Ourthe, Lesse, Semois and Lomme, in the regions of Namur, Dinant, Huy, Rochefort, etc.

Whatever the details of what actually happened, where, when and how in those early days of Flemish history, what is important in this study is to retrace the origins of the strange name “Buc”.

The information about this evil lord Phinaert, Prince of Buc, is extremely interesting for our research into the possible link between the “Buck” from Flanders and the “Buc” from Belcastel. We will not go into the details of Alexandre Dumas' narrative. We shall retain the essential elements drawn from the most remote traditions and legends.

We will soon discover that the legends seem to merge. One day Lyderic crossed the path of a hunting party headed by the Merovingian King Dagobert I, who was unknown to him. Hunting a boar, the latter, wounded, attacked the king's horse which, seriously wounded, reared up and fell on its master. Lyderic killed the boar and went to the king's rescue and saved his life. This took place in the forest of Brame.

Lyderic knew then that the person whom he saved the life was King Dagobert I. After some brief presentations, and thanks to a letter read to him by the Bishop de Noyon, King Dagobert I realised that Lyderic was no one else than the legal heir of the Prince of Dijon, who had been killed by the prince Phinaert. The King immediately recognised Lyderic as a Prince.

Lyderic, wanting to avenge his father, summoned the prince Phinaert to a duel to be witnessed by their suzerain King Dagobert I and his entourage. Following a frightening omen that is well entrenched in his family, the prince preferred humiliation to fighting with Lyderick. So did Prince Phinaert hand over the keys of his castle and all his lands to King Dagobert I and disappeared.

Some other sources report that Prince Phineart, instead of having willingly surrender all his estates and his titles to the King Dagobert I, accepted the fight and was killed by Lyderic:

«…occis et vaincu en camp clos le susdit Phinaert meurtrier de son père, en la présence du Roy Dagobert…» or «…killed and conquered by a fight, in a fenced (closed) area the aforesaid Phinaert murderer of his father, in the presence of King Dagobert…».

The same day, the King received in the castle of Buck, the oath and homage of Lyderic for the principality of Dijon, the principality of Buck and the county of Harlebecque. The king added a new title to those he already had, he appointed him as first forester of Flanders. Then, when the king had been well feted with all his court at the castle of Buck, he took the road to Soissons, his capital.

To summarize, in recognitions of all these deeds, the Merovingian King Dagobert I designated Lydéric I (*abt 620 +676 or 692), Grand Forester of Flanders and had him inherited from the principality of Buc. He became also from the king, the title of Count of Tournaisis (646), Count d’Artois in Lens, Leude and Sieur de Thérouanne (649) and d'Aras and Sieur van Harlebeke (Harelbeke). Lydéric’s lineage is what will become later the first Counts of Flanders. His titles were confirmed much later, in the year 862, at Tournai, by the king Charles the Bald, head of the Carolingians dynasty.

Lydéric I is said to have founded the city of Lille (Rijssel in Flemish) in the same year of 640 CE, lived a long life and is said to be buried in Aire-sur-la-Lys.

As we have seen earlier, Lydéric I was married to Richilda, a Merovingian princess who happened to be the sister of King Dagobert I. A drastic increase in the intermingling of the various great lineages is already apparent right here, a phenomenon which, although already existing in ancient Greece and Rome, will increase explosively with the arrival of the Franks in our lands. It was then consolidated under the reigning dynasties of the Merovingians, Carolingians and Capetians and remained a constant in the social history of the High Middle Ages until the beginning of the 20th century.

Thanks to the “Annales de Flandres” by Pierre d´Oudegerst, a XVIst century doctor in Law and historian, we know that Lydéric I, was called «le Buc» but also “Buc” or “Bouck” its phonetic variant. By looking closely at the history of Lyderic, we learned about the existence of a Prince of Buc, living in his castle of "Buc", all of which took place in Flanders.

This leads to another incredible coincidence: How is it that the village and the ruins of Belcastel, near Limoux, are called "Belcastel-et-Buc" and that a very important Flemish lord, the first "Grand Forester" of Flanders, probably of Celtic origin, living 1,000 km to the north, had a suffix “Buc” added to his patronymic name, which happens to be that of the small brook running at the foot of Belcastel, the small castle of the Flemish Bels/Belle family estate? At the foot means exactly 200 meters below, practically at the edge of the hamlet. The brook takes its source only some 500 m north-east of the castle.

Or could it have been the other way round, that the name of this little stream was named after the "Grand Forestier", by some of his knights, wanting, by this way, to indicate their Flemish origin, or their Flemish connections as was so often the case in the south of France? The essence of the message, transmitted to the one who can understand its meaning, is comparable to those found in the hamlets of "Bellesasts" - "Montbel" - "Baylards” - “Castel Bel” - “Ambels”, etc.

Apart from Belcastel et Buc, there are only two other geographical or place names on the whole planet that answer to "Buc". Although both are in France, they cannot be considered valid options to solve our mystery:

1. The first “Buc” appeared in documents at the end of the 12th century. Under the influence of the Lords of Montbéliard, “Buc” came in the mid-14th century, under Habsburg sovereignty and belonged to the Lordship of Belfort.
2. The second “Buc” is a municipality in the department of Yvelines that goes back to the year 1660. That year the “Buc” area was annexed to Versailles and used as a hunting ground by Louis XIV. This appellation comes from the Latin “buscum”, meaning boxwood.

Regardless of how the problem is presented, the fact is that:

1. there is a link between these two extremely rare names, as with the “Les Bels” and “Les Bayles” hamlets, in the South of France.
2. there were only two “Buc” on the whole planet Earth at the time of its appearance. One in Flanders and one in Belcastel & Buc.
3. A small stream named "Buc" flows right at the foot of the small castle of Belcastel & Buc which happened to belong to the Bels, a Flemish Family.
4. This Flemish Family was vassal of the Forester Lydéric le “Buc”, the ancestor of the Counts of Flanders!

These coincidences are so extraordinary that they command us to change the term. It is no longer a fortuitous, accidental, unforeseen act but on the contrary a conscious, thoughtful, intentional, and voluntary one. In this constellation of pseudo-coincidences, we are obliged to recognize that it slyly commands the logic to take position despite the illogical appearances (sic).

On the 9th September 2022, I contacted the Belcastel et Buc’s Town Hall. The lady mayor Anne Valmigère being on leave, a municipal employee assured me that the word "Buc" came from the town of "Buc" in the Yvelines (6027 inhabitants in 2019). When I asked her if this name could not also come from the town of "Buc" (275 inhabitants in 2019), near Belfort, she told me that she did not know about the existence of this place. The employee assured me that it would bring nothing to ask the lady mayor about the “Buc” appellation because she would know nothing more!

It very quickly becomes evident that none of these two "Buc" denominations have any connection whatsoever with the “Belcastel et Buc” of the south, nor with the Flemish “Forester” Lyderic. The “Buc” next to Belfort, appeared some 600 years later than the appellation in Flanders and the “Buc” from Versailles, some 1,000 years later!

The origin of the word “Buc” is very uncertain. It may be in one of the key languages of the Middle Ages West Europe: Latin, old French, English, Diets (archaic German) or German. Some believe that it may be a variant of the Flemish word “den Bok” - “le Bouc” in French or - “der Bock” in German. We must consider that:

1. This suffix is not a regular one, such as topographic name: Pierre de Peyrepertuse, Robert d’Artois, John of Durham, or Peter of Newcastle.

2. This suffix is neither a common adjective used to qualify, to describe or to better identify a person such as: Charles le Chauve (The Bald), Charles Martel (the Hammer), Charlemagne (Charles the Big), Guillaume le Conquérant (Wilhelm the Conqueror), and Emperor Friedrich Barbarossa (Red Beard).

3. This suffix is difficult to understand to untrained eyes, such as in: Pieter van Belle (Balliol), Joos Bels (van Belle), Philippe de Milly (Napelhouse), Maximilien de Tornaco (Tournai), Jan van Steenvoord (Estainfort), Baudouin d’Eecke (Oosthover), Barnard de Douxlieu (Dulcis Locus), William Rufus (Red or Redhead), Rogier van der Weyden (de la Pasture), Gérard de Ridefort (de Sterke Rider), Robert the Bruce (van Brugge), etc. In some cases, the help of the Heraldry is mandatory.

But what is the purpose of using a suffix that probably means something, but that will probably remain forever a mystery? What is the purpose of calling “Lydéric I le Buc”, if the word “Buc” is unknown and incomprehensible?

The word “Buc” has in Catalan, at least seven different meanings. One of them refers to a “streambed”! The word is endemic of the South of France. This could constitute an explanatory spark. Unfortunately, it is far too ephemeral to ignite a serious study for the good and simple reason that there is no Catalan corresponding word in Flanders! As one said on a beautiful spring day "Elementary my dear Watson"!

Etymologically the word “Buc” may come from the Latin word “Buxum” (Boxwood) or from the Frankish (old German) “Buche” which designate a Beech Tree. The Franks in Gaul will call the “Buche” - “Haistr”, the origin of the French word “Hêtre”.

In the past, a vast forest, or rather a series of forests, approached the sea in Flanders and crossed the Rhine at Cologne under the name of the forest of Buck, Bucconia and Fania. This immense royal domain was administered by the foresters, from whom the first count or marquis of Flanders is said to have originated.

Flanders, which is confused in the chronicles with the country of Buc, was a forest that was part of the immense forest of the Ardennes. Most of present-day Belgium was once bristling with forests, especially beech forests, which were continuously connected, and all these forests bore names that were to become intertwined and confused.

The country preserves a host of local names which recall the old beech forests, and which seem to be mere echoes of the ancient name of Bucconi, Buck Forest and Fania Sylva.

The BUC under the Frankish kings apparently formed a large royal domain, which covered various countries with its woods and waters. The country where the Buck Forest was once under the authority of the foresters did not form a political territorial division.

The first forester, Lyderic, had his residence at the castle of Buc, in Lille, also called Lisle-Buc. The country of Buck, not far from the city of Isle, was also called Oudegherts. The heart of the Buck country was located around the castle of Lyderic in Lille (Rijssel).

The beech tree, as we know, is called in Flemish, Buek, Buekenboom, in German, Buche, in Latin fagus, and in the Middle Ages also, faia. Bucconia or Buchonia, fagia and fania, are synonyms. The first ones were probably used by people who spoke the Tuscan language. In places where the Romance language was dominant, the same name took another form when translated. The meaning of the names is the same, the word differs.

The widespread use of names from beech woods in these countries should not be surprising. When one considers the abundance of beech in our ancient forests. It was a source of wealth for our ancestors who fed their pigs and cattle in the woods and fattened them with faines and acorns.

Several charters have preserved the memory of this state of affairs. Sigebert in an act of largesse in favour of Saint Remacle, year 655, said: our Ardennes Forest feeds a prodigious multitude of cattle.

The foresters are often represented as the predecessors, in the government of the country, of the marquises and counts of Flanders, and this is quite wrong. The latter were invested with political and military power; the office of the former consisted mainly in the guarding and administration of the prince's domains. In the foreste regia, foreste dominica.

Lyderic did not have, like Baldwin, the mission of protecting the markets of the Kingdom against the Danes and the barbarians of the North. (Paraphrasing Hippolyte Van de Velde).

Another hypothesis, much less scientific to explain the origin of the word “Buc” than being the immense forest of Buc, Flanders and the Castle of Buc near the city of Lille (Rijssel) is to trace its origin to a feature of Lyderic's personality.

Since Lydéric I has been married 5 times and had a total of 17 boys (girls were not registered), the colloquial expression or surname “le Buc”, the “Billy goat”, may have perfectly described euphemistically, someone who ardently assures himself of the perpetuity of his posterity (sic).

“Buc” being in this hypothesis, a variant from the Flemish (archaic German) word “Bock” which is the name given to a male goat! Also called in French “le Bouc”! This is a rather gentle comparative synonym. Without the euphemism, the word "Buc" would have been much rougher and would give in English “Lydéric the f…… “. Their cousins, the Germans, would call him “Lydéric der B……. “ !

Whatever, although the origine of the word “Buc” remained obscure, its use was very circumstantial, such as the words we already met such as the “Baillessats” (the Bailles [Bels] know), the ”Baylards” (de Beiaards” or the home of the Bayls [Bels]) and the Ambels (as part of the toponym Ambialet). Only to quote three of them, one hundred pro cent linked to Flanders and to the same region in the South of France!

We now know that Lyderic le Buc was so named because he lived in a forest region of Flanders which was called "Buc", that his castle, of which he received the keys from Phinaert, was located in the city of Lille (Rijssel) and was that of "Buc” and that he was appointed forester for this huge royal forest.

Finding a brook bearing the name of “Buc” in the south of France may seem a coincidence. What is definitively not a coincidence is that this brook flows at the foot of the village and less than 200 meters from a Castle, both named “Belcastel and Buc” and that the lords of the place called Bels or Belle, happened to be Flemish vassals of a Flemish Suzerain?

Coincidence and chance have no longer place here. We must transcend these states of things and make them the result of a will, of a design, of a thoughtful action with a very precise goal. The fact that these denominations are present in so many places in the south of France and with such insistence is no coincidence either.

This leads us to believe that these places were so named in order to indicate, to inform future generations, that they were in some way connected to distant Flanders. Is this not the reason why, in the new world, places are called after European cities or patronymics: Paris, Orange, Versailles, Berlin, Cambridge, or Lafayette, St Louis, Deridder, Vanderbilt, etc.?

Now there is another, far much bigger mystery to be solved, which will not be possible in the course of these essays, and which is why:

• Lyderic I, whose dynastic core was in Flanders, came to the wacky idea to marry, an unknown and never seen before, woman from the distant Roussillon area of the South of France? Her name was Eringarde (Ermengarde) also “Flandrine”, of Roussillon, who lived in Rennes-le-Château?
• Dagobert II, the Merovingian King of Austrasia, whose dynastic core was in Tournai (Flanders) and in Herstal (Liège, Belgium), decided on his return from captivity in Ireland, to rejoin Rennes-le-Château where he married, in 671, Gisèle de Rhedae?
• Dagobert II’s daughter and son Sigisbert IV, fled the Ardennes Forest, near Metz, after the assassination of their father, to take refuge in Rennes-le-Château?
• And vice versa. Why did the Count of Barcelona Wilfredo (Guifred) “el Velloso” (*ca. 840 +897) came to the wacky idea to cavalcade over 1000 km to marry a woman from the distant Flanders, who happened to be Winidilde (Gunédilde in French) van Vlaanderen (*ca. 860), the daughter of the Count of Flanders Baudouin I (*ca. 837 +879)? The wedding took place in ca. 879.

Did the future couple meet before? Certainly not, since the “Assembly of Coulaines” (Treaty of Verdun) was held in 843 and Winidilde was not even born at that time. Were present on that historical day, the biggest vassals of the three protagonists: King Charles, King Lothar and King Louis. Among the vassals of King Charles were Baudouin, the 7^th Forester of Flanders and the Count of Urgell and of Cerdagne, Sunifred from Barcelona (*805 +848).

We know that it was at the assembly in Coulaines, that the families of Flanders and Barcelona met. It was there that members of our lineages, including the Bels, met the Barcelona family, since at least one Bels actively (administratively) participated and officiated as a legal official, lawman, scribe, or adviser to one of the Frankish kings. The Bels append his signature on the Treaty. Being from Flanders, it is a safe bet that the Bels was attached to the court of King Charles the Bald.

In addition to that, we have also the proof that, in Flanders, in the year 1116, the Belle met the Lord Balduim Borel, the count of Barcelona. And of course, we know that the Bels met the Bishop Borrellus, in 1014, in Vacarisses (Spain). More on this, page 432 and 439.

And so we can complete the circle. This is how lineages as far apart as those of Flanders and northern Spain met and developed close family ties and started migratory movements that are difficult to explain otherwise. There are of course other possibilities such as members of our lineages established in these remote areas as a result of the Frankish Reconquista campaigns, and of course as the result of the escorts and close protections given to King Dagobert II, and later to his daughter and son Sigisbert IV.

Baldwin I did not attend the Assembly as hereditary Count (Comes flandrensium) or Marquis (Marchisus) of Flanders, since these titles were only granted to him, in 863, by King Charles the Bald, his father-in-law (from whom he had snatched his daughter), but as the 7th and last Forester of Flanders.

The same was true of Count Sunifred, who was granted the titles of Count of Barcelona, Girona, Osona, Besalú, Narbonne, Béziers, Nîmes, Lodève and Marquis of Gothia (West Francia) by Charles the Bald, at the Treaty of Verdun in 843. This enabled Sunifred to assert his position in Gothia and Septimania.

The close relationship between the counts of Flanders and of Barcelona may have been at the origin of an agreement for a future marriage between the two families, as was often the case. This would explain several issues we noticed during our study of both dynastic Houses!

This does not prevent us from asking ourselves what was the magnet that attracted and held all these families together? What in the world was so important in these two geographical hot spots of southern France and of southern Flanders in the high Middle Ages, and in Flanders and Florence in the Middle Ages, until the renaissance period? What was really going on in these remote regions?

Why were the treasures of the Temple of Salomon, from the Visigoths, from Rome, from the Merovingians, from Cathars, from the Templars, from Isabelle Ist de Castille, from the Archduchess Marie-Thérèse d’Autriche-Este, from Countess of Chambord, from the Habsburgs, etc. hidden in or next to Rennes-le-Château?

And what are the biggest treasures ever hidden there, that not only inspired but also commanded the greatest painters and sculptors the world has ever known, to encode their works with secret and crucial information about historical events of ancient times? See paintings and sculptures pages 274,323,337-351,369-374.

The Merovingian kings were referred to as “Les rois fainéants” or “The lazy kings”. Were they really lazy? This is the message addressed to the common but the hidden message, reserved for those who cannot only read, but also understand, is quite different. They will understand the real play of words and make it: “Les rois fait néants” or “The kings reduced to silence” !

Another very significant play of words, in French, is: “Pas dedans” for “Pas de dents” that stands for “not in” and “no teeth”. This kind of transposition is feasible in all languages. For example, in English: “I will come with the night” could be understood as “I will come with the knight”.

The transmitters of a “parallel History”, running next to the official one, described its course in totally different ways than those we were inculcated with. That is without being manipulated, truncated, and falsified by the political and religious powers for more than two thousand years.

In those times, the Comté du Roussillon was part of the Comté of Septimania. It is in this area, and in the neighbouring Comté of Tolosanum, that our lineages settled down as soon as the Merovingian times. It is also there that we find Rennes-le-Château and Belcastel-et-Buc.

As mentioned previously, I wondered why the castle of Belcastel-et-Buc was saved from destruction by the crusade against the Cathars while all other strongholds, being them Cathars or Templars, were destroyed.

The historical sources mentioning the fact that William Bélibaste, the perfect Cathar, was sent anno 1321, for his execution at the castle of Villerouge-Termenès, implicitly implies (sic) that this castle had not been destroyed by the crusaders either. The question is why?

The castle of Villerouge-Termenès belonged since anno 1070, to and was occupied by a Lord called Pierre de Peyrepertuse. This Lord handed it over to his daughter as a dowry at her wedding with Pierre Olivier de Termes. For some reasons, in 1107, the Pope Pascal II confirmed the Archbishop Richard of Narbonne in his possession of Villerouge and three years later the « de Termes » family agreed reluctantly to hand over the castle to the archbishop which they used as summer residence.

Another castle next to Villerouge-Termenès, the Château Durfort. This castle was not destroyed neither. It became, in anno 1215, the property of Alain de Roucy, one of Simon de Montfort lieutenants. Durfort is built on a rocky site overlooking the gorges of the Orbieu, offering a good view of the valley. The earliest written references mentioning the castle date from the 11th century.

In 1093, it was mentioned in a transaction between the son of the lord of Durfort, Bertrand, and the Abbey of Lagrasse.

In 1124, Guillaume and Raymond, lords of Durfort, paid homage to Viscount Bernard Aton of Carcassonne, and in 1163, the lord of Terme paid homage to Viscount Raymond de Trencavel, for the castle of Durfort. In 1241, Olivier de Termes agreed with the King of France Louis IX and so got his estates back, castle of Durfort included. The Lord Olivier is told to have given the castle back to the previous lords of Durfort. In 1243 Hugues de Durfort, swore allegiance to the King (anno 1243) and joined, in 1244, the crusaders at the siege of Montségur.

And still another one (all castles relatively close to each other), the Castle of Termes: “… was built on a promontory, defended on three sides by formidable deep ravines, the crumbling ruins of the castle cover an area of 16.000m². Held by the Cathar heretic Ramon (Raymond) de Termes, the castle only fell to Simon de Montfort after a siege lasting four months, from August to November 1210, the hardest siege of the first period of the Albigensian crusade. Following an exceptionally dry summer and autumn, the empty water tanks led Raymond to offer surrender. However, as the crusaders advanced to possess the castle, they were met with a hail of arrows.

A heavy storm overnight had replenished the cisterns, and the defenders were able to hold out a little longer. Later, weakened from dysentery, and exposed to the fire of numbers of siege weapons, the garrison attempted unsuccessfully to creep out at night. The alarm was raised, the fugitives caught and killed, and Raymond surrendered the castle. After de Montfort's death, Raymond regained possession of the castle but was soon forced to give it up again, this time to the King of France. Rebuilt in the 13th century as a royal garrison, the castle was one of the "sons of Carcassonne" (five castles defending the border with Aragon and later Spain). When the border moved further south in the 17th century, the castle lost its function…”. Source: TAUÉ, Michèle.

These castles were saved from destruction either by remaining in catholic hands or to ensure the crusaders, in their campaign against the Cathars and Albigenses, to have something to fall back on or for intendancy purposes.

Although there is nowhere a single mention of the castle of Belcastel-et-Buc one may be almost certain that, this stronghold was, for the same reasons, not destroyed by the crusaders either.

Moreover, it seems that for military strategy, there was a kind of demarcation line (at least for this region) constituted by the roads D129 and D40 running east of Limoux through the Corbières to the castles of Durfort, of Termes and of Villerouge-Termenès. The Belcastel-et-Buc lies precisely on this demarcation route, as does Villardebelle! Below this “line” all castles were destroyed.

If Belcastel-et-Buc was also used by the crusaders, what would indeed fit to the overall picture, why is there not a single mention of it?

All I know is that the castle remained intact until the XIVth century: “…The last inhabitants of the Belcastel-et-Buc abandoned the castle sometimes during the XIVth century. According to historians, the ruins have been inhabited and totally abandoned ever since...”.