The title is misleading. It is the story of the Sinclair family that built the chapel and their castle from the darkest and dimmest origins of Sanctus Clarus to today. They were linked to the famous Templars and the armourers' guilds, groups, that followed them, many of them gypsies from Egypt. When the Templars came back to Europe they settled in many places but were particularly welcome in Rosslyn. The Rosslyn Sinclairs became the weapon providers of the Scottish crown and various factions. When the Templars were banned, it is highly probable that at least some of the ships transporting their treasures took refuge in Rosslyn. The chapel is built as a crossing and mixing of various influences. First the Templars influence and the clearly asserted desire to build a new Temple of Solomon with the two columns of Jachin and Boaz. Strangely enough in reverse order when compared with the original in Jerusalem : Boaz, the master, and Jachin, the pupil, the apprentice. Apart from this element many other elements are wrongly interpreted. The vault is a barrel vault, so romanesque, whereas the outside look is Gothic. The extremely carved decoration and tiling is not cistercian (Saint Bernard was for plain and only vegetal decoration) but directly romanesque, hence benedictine. What Andrew Sinclair says is problematic. Some elements are even unacceptable the way he presents them. He says there are seventy odd green men borrowed from nordic mythology. Wrong. Green men are Irish, hence Celtic, and they are always twinned with Sheela-na-gigs, female representations of fertility. Sinclair does not even speak of Sheela-na-gigs. So either they were all destroyed as lustful, or they were never there and then the green men are a continental Celtic representation widely recuperated by the Benedictines in their romanesque period and they are « wuyvres », male repr?sentations of the creative power of nature, of underground forces, and of the power of the Verb, the Word, hence a representation of the Druid, the one who knows, the master, recuperated into the Christian faith as the patriarch, the creative power of the Verb, the Word, of God's Word, hence of the creative power of God. I could multiply examples, and I should visit this chapel to really see what it is all about. A last remark. The final diatribe against those who invented 50 years ago (on the basis of a quite longer tradition) the connection of the Saint Clairs with the blood line of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is out of place in a serious book. The final paragraph against the Da Vinci Code in this diatribe is purely un-academic and hence absurd.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, Universit? Paris Dauphine, Universit? Paris I Panth?on Sorbonne
