The Islands of the Archangel Michael and their connection to Melkin

Melkin the prophet directs us with geometrical precision to the Tomb site of Joseph of Arimathea in Avalon, the same mystical island site as the burial place of King Arthur. This Island is synonymous with the Island of Sarras where the Holy Grail is stored. Joseph of Arimathea chose to deposit the Grail Ark or the Holy Graal in the fabled Isle of Ictis where he had previously traded tin. The Templars then subsequently, after their disbanding by the pope and the king of France, buried their treasure in the same tin vault on Burgh Island in southwest England.

You can find the whole sequence of events as to how Glastonbury has misrepresented itself as King Arthur’s burial site and how it is that Glastonbury tor has been mistakenly identified with the Isle of Avalon by clicking on the following links:

http://jesusinavalon.blogspot.co.uk chapters 1-10

http://templartreasure.blogspot.co. chapters 11-16

Continuation from previous:

We have up to this point seen the way that Glastonbury was suddenly made prosperous after the arrival of Henry of Blois otherwise known as Monseigneur Blois (1101–1171), who became Abbot of Glastonbury Abbey from 1126. If we are correct in assuming that he is our Master Blihis that knew all about the stories of the Graal, then we must assume that the author referenced in the last chapter of the High History is copying the work of Henry of Blois and this is borne out by the copyist;
 ’For the Lord of Neele made the Lord of Cambrein this book be written, that never before this was treated in Romance but one single time besides this (this is the copy that Master Blihis put together, Perlesvaus) and the book that was made before that is so ancient that only with great pains may one make out the letter (this is the original copy in Latin that Melkin brought to France). And let Messire Johan de Neele well understand that he ought to hold this story dear, nor ought he to tell nought thereof to misunderstanding folk, for a good thing that is spread amongst bad people is never recorded faithfully'.

 

The Messire Johan, Seingnor of Neele, can only be ‘John de Nesle’ who was present at the battle of Bouvines in 1214. This ‘Seingnor of Neele’ can be found in Migne, Dictionnaire des Abbayes et Monastères, and the reference relates to the founding of the Abbaye aux Bois, near Nesle, in 1202 (or 1200) by ‘Jean, seigneur de Neele, chatelain de Bouges (Bruges) et Eustachie de St.Paul (Pol), sa femme.’ Their marriage is also later confirmed, so we are referencing the same person.
This is written after the discovery of Arthur at Glastonbury and 30 years after the Glastonbury fire, but this is a copy of Henry’s ‘Perlesvaux’ written earlier around 1150. There are certain bits in the ‘high history’ that may have been used by Henry to convince people that Glastonbury was Avalon, even before the great necessity to do so after the fire by the subsequent Glastonbury polemicists. However he stuck to the story which for the most part revolves around a Chapel on a tidal Island near a valley and a river. Hardly an exact description of Glastonbury tor.

 We must not forget that William of Malmesbury did not know where Avalon was, but if anyone could get away with this transformation, (or even later find it convenient to promote such a position),  it would be the one person who knew all the tales of the Graal. Although Henry never directly sets out to say that Glastonbury is Avalon and can be seen to recount the tales of King Arthur and the Grail Keepers faithfully from Melkin’s text and previous oral accounts from troubadours, there are certain ways of persuading others, if one does not  attentively take into account, the geographical descriptions in the Branches of the High History.
 After all, to title the entire work Perlesvaus or ‘through the vales’ indicates that all the stories in the Branches, take place in a certain region and revolve around geographical descriptions that apply to a kingdom specifically located by the title of the book; especially with the main protagonist called 'Perceval' (through this Valley). Some commentators have thought that a French version before Henry compiled his, might have been from a mistranslation of Pellesvaus or the vales of King Pelles the sometimes fisher king.

You have the name of Perceval on this account, that tofore you were born, he (the lord of the moors)had begun to reave your father of the Valleys of Camelot, for your father was an old knight.

"Sir," saith she, "He was the son of Alain li Gros of the Valleys of Camelot, and is named Perlesvax."
"Wherefore Perlesvax?" saith the King.
"Sir," saith she, "When he was born, his father was asked how he should be named in right baptism, and he said that he would he should have the name Perlesvax, for the Lord of the Moors had reft him of the greater part of the Valleys of Camelot,
The original story teller lets us know that by right of baptism his name is derived from his inheritance 'from among these valleys'. through Troubadour distortion this later account gets confused often, when the storyteller recounts about islands of the moors unless he is referring to Dartmoor tors.  However the gist is that the Lord of the Moors seems to have overtaken some of the remenant of the Holy families lands in the time of Perceval, but the land that his father is giving him the title to (in name) is the land that stretches across or throughout the valleys (Perlesvaux).

As we posited earlier, Joseph could have owned the Island and there are accounts of Arviragus giving him it, but this may be of later fabrication or an incidental confirmation. We must not forget that Joseph must have been incredibly wealthy being a trader in a commodity that was so sought after in the Roman world and he had known where to source this material......operating a monopolistic enteprise to the Eastern mediterranean. If the Romans had known where Ictis was located, Pliny would have let us know. As we shall cover at the end of this investigation it is this Island that is mentioned in a charter as being accompanied by fisheries and Castles known as an area called Venn, (or Vales).

However, the worst misdirection that scholars have come up with is derived purely from the assumption that the Grail stories and the Perlesvaus in particular, have absolutely no historical basis and are thought of as poems or prose of a didactic nature. This can be seen here in an extract from Nitze:

 The Perlesvaus belongs to the second group and owes its origin to the religious dissentions in England between the Saxons, converts to Roman Christianity, and the Britons, adherents of the heretic Irish Church. The Grail and the Lance, we are told, were originally the national emblems of the Britons. As such they were cherished even after the Britons had accepted Christianity from the Irish. Finally, through the influence of St. Augustine and his followers, they were identified with Christian relics (those of Calvary), and thus they became symbols of the Church. In the Perlesvaus, they are the special insignia of the true faith and the bone of contention between Saxon and British Christians. The theme of the romance is clearly indicated in the words : 'effacer la mauvaise hi et exhausser la loi nouvelle' ; Perceval is the champion of the true faith, and his mission is to overcome and convert the infidels ; viz, the heretic Britons.

James Carley, however, (without whom, much of the research on Glastonbury material would be unavailable), has formed the sceptical opinion that the Melkin prophecy is probably a fabrication and others have followed like Subdeacon Paul Ashdown ……the enigmatic ‘Prophecy of Melkin’, included in the Chronica of the monk John ‘of Glastonbury’ (John Sheen) of 1342, which built upon the work of William of Malmesbury and Adam of Domerham. The previously unheard-of character of Melkin, who was ‘before Merlin,’ is presented in the same vaticinatory pseudo-Welsh tradition as the Arthurian seer (Merlin) as imagined by Geoffrey of Monmouth, and the Latin is therefore deliberately cryptic. Here we read for the first time of the burial of Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, in a hidden tomb which will be revealed at a millennial future time before the Day of Judgement. He lies (as I have argued elsewhere ) in a folded linen shroud, probably to be identified with that of Christ, and with two vessels containing (presumably one of each) Christ’s blood and sweat’.  Yet translates the Prophecy:

The Isle of Avalon, avid before others in the world for the death of pagans, decorated at the sepulchre of them all with vaticinatory little spheres of prophecy, and in future it will be adorned with those who praise the Most High. Abbadare, powerful in Saphat, noblest of pagans, took his sleep there with 104,000. Among them Joseph named ‘of Arimathea’, took perpetual sleep in [a] marble [tomb]. And he lies in a doubled linen [cloth] by the southern corner of the oratory fashioned of wattles, above the powerful adorable Virgin, the aforesaid thirteen sphered [things] inhabiting the place. For Joseph has with him in the sarcophagus two white and silver vessels filled with the blood and sweat of the prophet Jesus. When his sarcophagus is found, it will be seen whole and undefiled in the future, and will be open to all the orb of the earth. From then on, neither water nor heavenly dew will can be lacking for those who inhabit the most noble island. For a long time before the Day of Judgement in Josaphat these things will be open and declared to the living.

It goes on to say: This rigmarole may well incorporate older elements but, in the form in which we have it, is datable to the aftermath of Edward I’s visit through the inclusion of the figure of Abbadare. As first suggested in 1981 by James Carley, he is to be identified with Baybars (in Arabic al-Malik al-Zahir Rukn al-Din Baybars al-Bunduqdari), Sultan of Egypt and Syria, Edward’s formidable adversary during the Ninth Crusade, who had captured the fortress of Safed, Melkin’s ‘Saphat,’ (and with it the Galilee) from the Templars in 1266, and died of poisoning in July 1277, in the year before Edward’s visit to Glastonbury. I have argued elsewhere that Melkin’s reference originated in some satirical lay which had consigned the deceased Baybars and his paladins to one of the alternative Mediterranean, Oriental or Antipodean locations of an Avalon which has here been repatriated, along (uncomprehendingly) with the Sultan, to its British origin.

 

Included among the sleeping ‘pagans’ (i.e., in contemporary usage, Muslims), perhaps because of his status as a wealthy Jew, is Joseph of Arimathea. Although ‘Melkin’ is the oldest source to tell of his burial at Glastonbury, his tomb’s exact location is clearly regarded as an occult secret. It seems most unlikely that John Sheen was himself the author of the Melkin doggerel. Indeed, he seems to have been the first to confuse the mysterious linea bifurcata, which I have interpreted as a shroud, with some kind of esoteric line in church or churchyard.
 

 

So it is easy to see, with these pronouncements debunking the Prophecy (that short of being granted permission by the owners of the Island to show them where the entrance is, which we shall get to later), we need to look at further evidence provided by the second oldest authority…… from Henry Blois. This, although no-one has ever tried to fit the descriptions in any of the Branches to a location, seems a good way of confirming if Melkin, after all, has left directional instructions that also lead us to the Island described in the text.

It can be seen in the Perlesvaus, (even though the various stories that Henry Blois is recounting seem intermingled) that the geography of the area seems to be constant. This can be explained by accounts that Henry heard orally maintaining these features as part of the logic of the story line or maybe he himself sourced some material in written form.  The one puzzling feature about many of the Grail stories is that even though the stories may have different characters the core back drop is always similar. Melkin’s original work of different generations living in one locale i.e the vales south of Dartmoor is one way of looking at it. 
 Elucidation by the troubadours of  Melkin’s Grail book may go far back, but the stories are never far from their geographical setting even though, once a locale is visualised, (as in our proposed location) the accounts may not  accurately match spatially, as this was accounted as extraneous detail by the trobadours who focused more on character detail. 
 For  those people who are still open-minded enough to accept that the original account of the Grail's arrival in Britain is historical; enough relevant material has survived attaching itself to the storyline, through troubadour embellishments and distortion, that lets us know that  the Island of Avalon is certainly not at Glastonbury.

 

 Even the specifics in accounts that have evolved would not flow in tandem with its original portrayal,  if  for instance the Castle is not opposite the Island of Avalon, as it appears in several varying accounts. In the several branches however, this castle belongs to different people like the Widow Lady, the Queen of Maidens the Fisher king and many others. This can be explained superficially as the generations changed so the muddle of relationships was exacerbated and with this muddle the castle on the shore was muddled with buildings on the island itself.
However the troubadour accounts have confused the castle with the Grail chapel on the Island opposite and even with Camelot. Whatever the confusion that has been caused by troubadours weaving their tales; directionally and spatially, there is enough incidental information that has been passed on to confirm the Grail romances do not take place at Glastonbury and have nothing in common with the topography which has survived in the storyline from Melkin's original Book of the Grail from which the entire compendium is derived. 
  What seems to have occurred is that Melkin originally is relating accounts that all transpired in the same area, around the Island of Avalon (situated in Devon)..... and troubadours have mixed the generations and stories that Melkin had originally laid down to explain the entire period from the arrival of Joseph up until the death of King Arthur.
 This is not to say though, that Melkin’s Grail book is a purely factual account, even though most or all of his information that he wanted passed on to posterity still exists in one form or another, because I don’t think he ever outwardly stated that the 'Grail object' was Jesus (exept in his prophecy). Rather, he formed stories segmented into branches (probably focusing on characters in each generation) that subliminally transferred information, just as he adeptly has managed to do in his English prophecy. The understanding of the nature of the Grail was subliminally transmitted as he weaved together historical stories  covering a period of about 4-5 hundred years.....from the time of Joseph through the generations of a royal ramily. He also related material pertinent to how these events play out in the elevation of Consciousness of Mankind (better known as the divine plan), but couched in didactic form to be acted out by our Grail Heroes. This is the mess that modern scholarship has pondered over; the answer to how Joseph of Arimathea is concurrent with King Arthur.

 

  It must never be forgotten that Melkin, the originator of all Grail material did not want anyone at the time he was alive to know where Avalon was. This is borne out by the way he constructed his prophecy. So, he is hardly going to describe precisely where the island is in the Grail book or exactly the purport of his exposé, but every detail of what we have proposed as a total scenario (from crucifixion to Arthur) so far, is somewhere mentioned or subliminally related in the various texts.  Melkin determined to set the rich tapestry of drama in the same vales in which they historically transpired and the original 'Grail Book' recorded the travails of a kingdom and bloodline through the Roman era.... up to and including the Saxon invasion. This at a much later date, as explained earlier,  through the troubadours and courtiers, started to include in later editions or reworkings, Templar motifs and occasional references to certain  more recent characters with cameo parts in the storyline.

 Although Melkin’s prophecy was supposed to be a puzzle, it would appear as if the reference in the 'High History' to the difficulty in reading the Latin in Melkin’s original book could be one reason for the troubadours misunderstanding of his work. It also adds credence to age of the Volume.  With the misunderstanding or misinterpretation came embellishment according to the tastes of the storyteller....... sometimes focusing on battle scenes by some  and in other ways,if they had a particular interest or penchant.
The spiritual nature of the Grail may have been highlighted by some troubadours and in  others ..... the quest or the particular relationships between warring relatives.  The geographical topography is inescapable...... just as much as all the content in the storylines is set in a particular backdrop. Basically, the story is about a body and a cloth that got put in a tomb on an island by Joseph of Arimathea and this island is in Devon or the Vaus d'Avaron.

 It is  advised that the reader should read the various Branches  of the Perlesvaus. After doing so, one can only conclude that what we have elucidated upon up until now, as regarding Joseph having brought a body to England and this body being presently on Avalon........ is exposed in many places throughout the text.

 Let us firstly reassert that the 'High History' is given the authority of the original story from a certain Josephus. This is essentially due to the fact that Melkin asserts (in his Latin text) that his account is derived from original detail supplied by Joseph of Arimathea. The strange thing is that...... the writer of the High history refers to him as a 'narrator' not as Joseph 'the eyewitness', protagonist and author from which the record is derived. Obviously the reference is only refering to that part of the sequence of events that Joseph himself would have been able to relay while alive..... but the veracity of  the authority of this account stems from Joseph and it to his authority that the author is appealing. Later the following accounts get unduly mixed with events that transpired after the death of Joseph yet it is to him the author appeals for his credibility.

 Now is the story silent of Perceval and cometh back to King Arthur, the very matter thereof, as testifies the history, that in no place is corrupted and the Latin lie not.

And all these adventures that you hear in this high record came to pass, Josephus telleth us, for the setting forward the law of the Saviour.

How else could it have been related if it is not an historical record from Joseph himself that Melkin found in the tomb. If Joseph did not come to England then it is a remarkable coincidence that both the Perlesvaus story revolves around a tomb and a shroud on an Island  called Avalon and Melkin's Prophecy (about the Island of Avalon) categorically states that,  there in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, lies the body of Jesus along with the Shroud. It would even be a coincidence that Maurus has the 'Holy party' coming as far west as Marseille. But then having established Ictis as an Island that was known to deal in tin...... and have Joseph of Arimathea ingnorant of it, would be a coincidence in the extreme. Especially when Melkin is telling us they are buried up high in Ictis (supra ad Ictis). I believe the reference to 'Solomon's ship' in many of the Grail sagas is a reference to the mode of transport i.e the Tin trading ship used by Joseph to reach Ictis. This in itself would be no great feat of navigation for the Phonecian traders and Maurus' account of the Holy family being blown by chance to Marseille was just a rationalisation of early accounts that the family had passed by that way.

 If the fact that Jesus' body (the Grail) was brought to England is not historical, then there is no Avalon anyway……… and no point in the monks at Glastobury trying to misrepresent Glastonbury to appear to be synonymous with a purely mythical island.  If this were the case, it would be even more fantastic that a supposed fabricated text called the Prophecy of Melkin gives precise directions to an Island (which he also incidentally called Avalon), that so concisely geographically fits the description of Avalon as described in the 'High History' of the Grail. There is then the further coincidence of  the same story that tells of a mysterious object that was brought to that same Island by Joseph of Arimathea. Further, it just so happens that the prophecy which is supposed to be a 13th or 14th century fabrication, tells us that Joseph and the Grail are buried within this fictitious Island.

 Anyway, Joseph is appealed to as the authority of the High History. What most scholars tend to be misled by, is the fact that Melkin is also relating history after Joseph’s death that takes into account the subsequent years and thus in their minds disqualifies Joseph of Arimathea, as being the one appealed to as a narrator by the High History. Don’t forget that most scholars think there is no historical content in the Grail literature, but it all evolved as a twelfth century fiction. How, if one takes this view, were the French responsible for propagating such a fiction about a mythical island in Britain and what would be the reasoning behind it.  How is it the topography of the island described in these  French tales corresponds to the Island pointed out by this fictitious monk known for his Geometry? 

  Obviously, as we saw in the Alliterative poem from which we derived the eyewitness account of the Grail which we came across earlier, these must have come from Joseph himself, as this deals with the remainder of the holy family’s actual arrival in Britain and the incidents that transpired immediately afterward.

 Josephus telleth us in the scripture he recordeth for us, whereof this history was drawn out of Latin into Romance, that none need be in doubt that these adventures befell at that time in Great Britain and in all the other kingdoms, and plenty enow more befell than I record, but these were the most certain.

 It is Robert de Boron (his original source being derived  from Melkin’s book of the Grail) that says the final destination of the Grail (although not explicitly Joseph himself) - is 'En la terre vers Occident / Ki est sauvage durement / En vaus d'Avaron'...... in the land to the West, which is very wild, in the Vales of Avalon. These are the rugged and steep sided forested valleys that cover an area south of Dartmoor.

Scholars claim Robert de Boron wrote after Chrétien, but Robert says  that he wrote his book before 1180, meaning he wrote his book around the time Chrétien was writing Eric and Enide and before he wrote Percival. Whoever scholars believe was the first medieval writer, Robert and Chrétien claim they were guided by a pre-existing book ....and so also does the Perlesvaus/High History account. So, it all comes down to Melkin...... as these writers are putting pen to paper probably 3-400 years after King  Arthur died (a bit late to suddenly think about fabricating myths of a British king) and why are French troubadours supposedly inventing this material about an island in Britain?

Most scholars recognise this incongruous fact, but rationalize the whole Grail edifice as having some relevance to Medieval religious squabbles. This might in part be the case with later infusion, but how is it that Joseph is giving first hand accounts (which obviously Melkin discovered) that pertains to events 1000 years before any of the troubadours wrote. Robert De Boron’s Le liuro de Josep de Arimthea translation from Portuguese says the book he used was ’secret’ and that:

 ‘I dare not and could not tell at the time of writing, but that I had the secret book before me wherein the histories are written by the great clerks of all time. Therein are the great mysteries, which are called the Graal’.

This would seem to be a reference to Joseph and Melkin in antiquity. Whether or not Henry is the compiler of the Perlesvaus from Melkin’s material, we can see that the island of Avalon was never meant as being applicable to Glastonbury except by those with a motive of self-promotion at Glastonbury. As we have discovered, much in Glastonbury was made to concur with Melkin’s prophecy, but from a different perspective, as we look through the text of the High History about allusions to Logres (supposedly Glastonbury) and the chapel dedicated to the Virgin Mary…… we can see that, to the gullible, the link might be made, but most emphatically the Island of Avalon is in the sea and the description in the text fits Burgh Island.

 No matter how tenuous the connection in the High History that the region in which the story is set might apply to Glastonbury, it is surely how it has been understood for the last 800 years.

But before we move on specifically to the Perlesvaus passages, let us just have a look if the geography of Chrétien de Troyes is different and try to understand some of his descriptions that have been delivered unintentionally and yet seem to fit with the Perlesvaus version. Let us not forget however neither Chretien or Henry Blois had a clue where Avalon was... or its surrounding topography.

 He summoned the best artisans in the land, and commanded them to build a tower, and exert themselves to build it well. The stone was quarried by the seaside; for near Gorre on this side there runs a big broad arm of the sea, in the midst of which an island stood, as Meleagant well knew. He ordered the stone to be carried thither and the material for the construction of the tower. In less than fifty-seven days the tower was completely built, high and thick and well-founded. When it was completed, he had Lancelot brought thither by night, and after putting him in the tower, he ordered the doors to be walled up, and made all the masons swear that they would never utter a word about this tower.

Finally, she travelled so far through hill and dale, up and down,(Devon) that more than a month had passed, and as yet she had learned only so much as she knew before—that is, absolutely nothing. One day she was crossing a field in a sad and pensive mood, when she saw a tower in the distance standing by the shore of an arm of the sea. Not within a league around about was there any house, cottage, or dwelling-place. Meleagant had had it built, and had confined Lancelot within.

 Even in Chretien's 'Lancelot' the tower variously synonymous with the Grail chapel was by the sea not at Glastonbury.
The Grail Chapel or Castle as it is variously known is on the Island of Avalon and the tidal causeway as at Burgh Island is the 'Bridge' of varying descriptions in many Grail versions. In the ‘Knight and the Cart’ Chretien who really has never seen the sand causeway to Burgh Island is struggling to describe something in the text from which he is sourcing his material.

One is called the water-bridge, because the bridge is under water, and there is the same amount of water beneath it as above it, so that the bridge is exactly in the middle; and it is only a foot and a half in width and in thickness.

 Copyright Francis Frith

Figure 78. The disappearing bridge that is once narrow and then widens

In this island no thunder is heard, no lightning strikes, nor tempests rage, nor do toads or serpents exist there, nor is it ever too hot or too cold. Graislemier of Fine Posterne brought twenty companions, and had with him his brother Guigomar, lord of the Isle of Avalon. Chrétien

Let us now look at the Perlesvaus:

Opposite the Island of Avalon was a castle that must have been in ‘Bigbury on sea’ and this, with the Folly hill site became known as Camelot. There was however a river behind the castle which had an anchorage and from this castle Avalon was seen. As we have covered already, Camelot never existed as a place and thus it existed in two places in the Perlesvaus. This may have been confused with where Arthur had held court (either at Avalon or in Tintagel), nevertheless the original French transcriber had seen this word in Melkin’s text and included it as being synonymous with a place name.

Behind the castle was a river, as the history testifieth, whereby all good things came to the castle, and this river was right fair and plenteous. Josephus witnesseth us that it came from the Earthly Paradise and compassed the castle around and ran on through the forest as far as the house of a worshipful hermit (Shipley Bridge) and there lost the course and had peace in the earth. All along the valley thereof was great plenty of everything continually, and nought was ever lacking in the rich castle that Perceval had won. The castle, so says the history, had three names. One of the names was Eden, the second, Castle of Joy, and the third, Castle of Souls. Now Josephus saith that none never passed away therein but his soul went to Paradise.

Showing what might be the location of the house of the worshipful Hermit at Shipley Bridge at the start of the Avon valley as it leaves the moors.

The Text starts:

 Hear ye the history of the most holy vessel that is called Graal, wherein the precious blood of the Saviour was received on the day that He was put on rood and crucified in order that He might redeem His people from the pains of hell. Josephus set it in remembrance by annunciation of the voice of an angel, for that the truth should be known by his record of good knights, and good worshipful men how they were willing to suffer pain and to work for the setting forward of the Law of Jesus Christ, that He has willed to make new by His death and by His crucifixion.

The High history is an account of the travails of family relations connected to the holy family that arrived in Britain and the adventures of knights and property owners that occupied the region around the south coast of Devon in particular, but with references extending through Somerset and Cornwall. These include accounts in Arthur’s court at Tintagel and escapades to Penzance and as far up as the kingdom of Logres which is accounted by most to be synonymous with Glastonbury. Protection of castles by knights and services offered to damsels in distress that interact with colourful characters from across the English channel and the Channel Islands are integrated into an account of Joseph’s effect on having brought such a sacred object to the region.

These adventures or ‘Histoires’ fit in through the ages from the time the Grail was brought to Avalon up until the Death of king Arthur. The whole history, if it is not looked at as some intellectual exercise in conceptual critique and as having some deeper meaning………is just a record of the comings and goings of interrelated families that were established originally in the old Law of the residue of the tin mining Jews and the blood relatives of Jesus.

‘God hath guided and led the ship by day and by night until that she arrived at an island where was a castle right ancient, but it seemed not to be over-rich, rather it showed as had it been of great lordship in days of yore’.

 

‘Certes, I know not to tell you, for the tomb hath been here or ever that my father's father was born, and never have I heard tell of none that might know who it is therein, save only that the letters that are on the coffin say that when the Best Knight in the world shall come hither the coffin will open and the joinings all fall asunder, and then will it be seen who it is that lieth therein.'

There are two things to note that can only be accounted to Melkin directly that he purposely obfuscates……… the exact location of Avalon and the precise nature of the Grail. The first he has given so precisely in his prophecy once it is decoded and also, by faithfully transcribing details of the lay of the land in the valleys of Avalon.

 The second he has hinted at by having the questor’s not asking the question ‘Who does the Grail serve’. We are told it is achievable as this covers the aspect of its relevance to consciousness, but this leaves only one response subliminally and must be that ‘it serves God’... As Jesus had done faithfully. Joseph of Arimathea's Grave is pointed to in the prophecy and the Grail is intimately connected to Jesus but only in the prophecy is it made plain that Jesus is in fact buried with Joseph (who later was to become synonymous  as the Grail, mainly from the misunderstanting and objectivising of the Duo Fassula  . However by posing this question, this subconsciously releases the real question that is behind the essence of the Grail quest as presented in all its literal forms…… ‘Who is the Grail’? The Grail is Jesus who serves all of Mankind and God.

 

As we have already determined by the prophecy, Jesus is buried in Avalon, so let us see whether the Grail is the body of Jesus that sometimes is subterranean to the Grail chapel in the Island of Avalon. It would be an extraordinary coincidence if the faked twelfth century prophecy that says the shroud and the body of Jesus are on Avalon, concurs with French Grail material that speaks of a tomb, a shroud and of Joseph of Arimathea also on the Island of Avalon. This coincidence becomes less extraordinary if both accounts (those derived from the original Grail book in France and the British Prophecy which relates to the same exact material and personages), were derived from the same author.
 We should look into the text and see if the High History points to an Island that is the same as pointed out in Melkin’s prophecy by his precise geometry.

It would be very strange if it wasn’t the same island that both are referring to, since both sources derive from Melkin.

This high history witnesses to us and records that Joseph, who makes remembrance thereof, was the priest who first sacrificed to the body of Our Lord and for this, one ought to believe the words that come from him. You have heard tell how Perceval was of the lineage of Joseph of Abarimacie, whom God so greatly loved for that he took down His body hanging on the cross……… Ab Arimacie shows the original scribal error from the latin ‘of Arimathea’ by Henry.

 

What the ‘High History’ does not ever explicitly express is the names of the people in the historical sense and everyone abides in a castle or hermitage throughout. Whereas the Fisher king seems to be Joseph of Arimathea, the dolourous wound in connection to the loss of a son or nephew and the dripping spear always suggests Jesus. The tomb in which no one knows who the knight is that lies therein; is sometimes understood to be Joseph of Arimathea, or explicitly explained as Lohot, the son of King Arthur, but never Jesus, as this is the intended subliminal meaning being hinted at. The Widow lady who has a castle right opposite the Island of Avalon up on Folly Hill that overlooks Bantham is never mentioned as being Mary Magdalene and is purposely obfuscated as being synonymous with the Virgin Mary, at times defined by where her castle is in relation to Avalon and under which pseudonym she goes under in the various branches (such as the queen of Maidens or Widow Lady). Melkin as we have discussed is probably of this royal line and has cameo parts as the Hermit.

The hazardous tides that are relentless at the heads where the river Avon exits in view of the of the Island of Avalon underneath the position of the Widow's Castle.

We know that the river mouth is not far from the Castle as the river, spendeth itself in the sea is it most foul and most horrible, so that scarce may ship pass that is not wrecked.
 

 We also know that there is a Chapel and holy house on Avalon sometimes referred to as the castle of the Fisher king and the island is close by the mainland because after Perceval and his cousin leave Gohaz all sorrowing on the rock,
Perceval hath rowed until that he is come nigh a castle that was burning fiercely with a great flame, and can see the hermitage upon the sea hard by.

‘the sweetness of his castle wherein I have often done service in the chapel where the Holy Graal appeareth’.

We know that the Fisherman’s castle of Avalon is in the Sea

"Sir," says the Queen, "just as he challenges me for my castle , so I am in aid of King Fisherman, and every week cometh he from an island that is in this sea……”

What is the castle?"
"Sir, the good King Fisherman's, that is surrounded with great waters and plenteous in all things good, so the lord were in joy.

We Know that the Widow Queen can see the Island and has her vessels down in Bantham Harbour, ‘She takes Perceval by the hand and leads him to the windows of the hall that were closest to the sea. "Sir," she says, "Now you can see the island, there, where your uncle comes to in a galley, and in this island he stays until he has seen where to aim his blow and laid his plans. And here below, see, are my galleys that defend us thereof.’ Her Castle is on the cliffs above Bantham harbour entrance i.e the  heads where the river mouth flows into the sea.
 

 Both Chretien and the Perlesvaus describe the trip down through the forest when both Perceval and Lancelot meet people in a boat on the river that give the same instructions to the Grail Castle. In both stories, to be able to converse, their contact point in reality must have been along the Tidal road in Aveton Gifford and hence the ensuing topographically correct directions to Bigbury on sea and Avalon.

Perceval is in search of his mother, when he comes to a river en la vallee d'une engarde

The river is swift and deep, and he fears to cross it. Proceeding along the bank to a cliff, which apparently blocks the road (the end of the tidal road), he suddenly beholds a boat on the river, in which are two men. Perceval enquires the way of those in the boat and is directed, by the fisher, to the top of the cliff from where, he is told, he will see a castle in the valley beyond, près de rivière et près de bois.

The Tidal road where those fishing could converse with those making their way out to  the island of Avalon. The hills in the background are those to be climbed (mountains) before descending down to the island and the Widows Castle.

Perceval rides to the summit of the cliff, but perceiving at first only land and sky, he blames the fisher for misdirecting him. Finally, however, the tower of a castle hard by comes to view. Perceval is not long in reaching the castle where he is royally welcomed by the host of the castle, who is in fact the fisher. The misdirection that the fisher was maligned for,  can be explained by the fact that when one clears the summit,  after ascending up from the Tidal road, one cannot see the Folly hill site for some considerable time, until one starts to descend toward Bigbury on Sea where it will have come into plain view.

The View looking down on the river from the top of the hill on the way out to Burgh island as per  the directions  given by the fishermen. The river valley is tidal and one can float up and down with the tidal flow in a boat very leisurely.

We find the passage for comparison in Lancelot's Grail quest by Chretien, although the river is now called a stream which highlights the freedom  with which the troubadours inconsequentially included or changed the relevant topographical features because this same episode is derived from the common source of Melkin's Grail book:

Lancelot comes one day to a stream flowing through a meadow. The meadow, which is skirted by a forest on two sides, is covered with flowers. In front of him, on the stream, Lancelot sees a boat in which there are two white-haired knights and a damsel, holding a human head in her lap. In the centre of the boat there is a knight catching many fish. The boat has a smaller one in tow into which the knight is throwing his fish. At the sight of the group, Lancelot stops to ask where he might find shelter nearby. In reply, they direct him to a castle beyond a mountain. In a short time Lancelot has reached the foot of this mountain, and comes upon the cell of a hermit, where he enters the cell to confess his sins.

 

So both lancelot and Perceval arrive at the Grail castle in Bigbury on Sea, which as we know has the island of Avalon and the Grail chapel just opposite. Too much of a coincidence that both Grail searchers, from different raconteurs, find the same Grail castle... both recieving similar instructions. The instructions were recieved along the tidal road where at the end of the tidal road, one would have to rise up the hill (mountain) to get to Avalon or Bigbury on sea. Certainly arriving at the summit all one sees is ‘land and sky’ until going further down where the castle would have been situated and suddenly comes into view.
 What this shows is that by the similarity of storyline containing circumstances that can be transposed onto a geographical location with conversational text that include instructions which concur with the topographical features.... that when followed lead to Avalon; is also a confirmation that originally this particular account is set on the river Avon, which just coincidentally has the island at the mouth of the river and this same island is the one that Melkin refers to as Avalon and his geometry points us right to it.
 What we understand to be the first Grail literature may indeed be derived from a conglomeration of accounts compiled by Henry Blois as he is appealed to as one that knows all the stories, but these accounts appealed to a much older source in Joseph of Arimathea himself as their authority. This therefore evidences there was a common source before Henry, who obviously was Melkin. It is Melkin's words that say the authority for the Perlesvaus is derived from Joseph of Arimathea and it must be  from Melkin we have recieved the accounts up to the time of King Arthur  since  by his prophecy he is showing us the same Island location.

The view looking back down towards were perceval or Lancelot would have met the fishermen before climbing the hill out toward the Island of Avalon. This is on the same route that the carts of tin would have taken out to the Island of Ictis as it was referred to by classical writers, before Melkin renamed it Avalon.

The Lonely Forest, which would have enveloped Avalon in all the vales below the moors,  is mentioned in the Perlesvaus  as ‘la soteinne forest’ or  ‘la forest souteinne’ or by Chretièn as ‘De la foriest soutaine’. We can deduce that both Chretien and Henry Blois are sourcing  from a common source that supplies the same topographical detail that holds together their stories, which, unless they can be identified as being applicable to a certain locality, they might just seem incidental.

The Elucidation was conceived as a prologue to Chrétien de Troyes' unfinished romance Perceval, le Conte du Graal, but actually gives details that offer contradictory material so it is doubtful that it was written at the same time. In the elucidation it cites a Master Blihis as a source for its contents. As we have discussed Henry Blois would not want to have it known that he wrote this material and even gives himself a cameo role when Gawain defeats the knight Blihos Bliheris. Sent to Arthur's court, Blihos (H. Blois), reveals that the maidens descend from the Maidens of the Wells. Arthur and his knights then seek out the Fisher King and his castle.  If Henry 1098-1171 who as we have said was well connected and heard all these tales in his formative years in France... he seems the most likely candidate.  He is very likely to have put together a volume that thereafter in the Elucidation was credited as one source for Chrètien who between 1160 and 1172 served at the court of his patroness Marie of France, Countess of Champagne, daughter of Eleanor of Aquitaine.

 

 Another reason to be suspicious of the Islands translocation or the peculiarity of the mix up of Avalon and Glastonbury... is that Glastonbury was never tidal nor had beaches,

 

‘He dared no longer endure his blows, but rather he turns quickly toward his galley, and leaps straight in. He pushes out from the shore incontinent, and Perceval follows him right to the beach, feeling low that he has got away from him’.

Where the Queen of the Maidens castle is supposed to be, relative to Glastonbury tor, is not fathomable, nor is the fact that this saga is taking place by the sea where a Castle looks down on the Island of Avalon.

 "Sir," says the hermit, "I know not who he is, save only that the sea is hard by here, where the ship runs past often wherein the knight is, and he goes to an island that is under the castle of the Queen of the Maidens,

  How can Glastonbury ever have been misconstrued as existing by the sea, when we know the castle, (sometimes synonymous with Camelot) has an island opposite and has cliffs below it . It exists beside a river as certain knights rode to it while others were seen rowing down river to it.

‘He rode until he came to the castle of the Queen of the Maidens. When she knew that it was Messire Gawain, she made thereof great joy, and pointed him out the island whither Perceval had gone, and from where he had driven his uncle’.

‘Thereof has Messire Gawain right great joy, and so departs from the knight and the knight from him, and goes back toward the sea a great gallop. But Messire Gawain saw not the ship into which he entered, because it was anchored underneath the cliff. The knight entered into it and put out to sea as he had wont to do’.

 How can anyone seriously confuse these descriptions as happening near Glastonbury. How can Glastonbury tor be confused with coincidental topographical features mentioned incidentally that pertain to the area around Burgh Island. Realisically it can only occur if the Grail stories are accounted as fictitious. If they are, then so is Avalon. So why, one must ask, is Glastonbury witnessed in occupying  itself complying with certain features in Melkin's riddle. Why when one follows the progressive manipulation of the understanding of certain instructional data like the 'bifurcated line' , would Glastonbury acolytes be so eager to convince the world that it is a fictional Island in a fabricated tale. The only reason for doing this is because they knew Melkin was from Antiquity and the Island of Avalon was a reality.
 

The Folly Hill site which back in the fourth or fifth century was where the castle of the Queen of Maidens  or the Widow Lady existed, where one can see the Island, but has cliffs below it.

The Bantham anchorage showing the cliffs where the castle would have stood before recent buildings have obscured the site.

 ‘Lords, think not that it is this Camelot whereof these tellers of tales do tell their tales, there, where King Arthur so often held his court. This Camelot that was the Widow Lady's stood upon the uttermost headland of the wildest isle of Wales by the sea to the West. Nought was there save the hold and the forest and the waters that were round about it. The other Camelot, of King Arthur's, was situate at the entrance of the kingdom of Logres, and was peopled of folk and was seated at the head of the King's land, for that he had in his governance all the lands that on that side marched with his own.’

The translator has obviously translated Celtica or Galles as pertaining to Wales, but as one can see the peninsula where Avalon exists is on the uttermost headland of  Devon  and the Island (which is right by the widow's castle) is the headland described as the 'Avaron' in the vales of the west i.e to the south of Dartmoor and has a river right beside it.

These coastal scenes and escapades show that the whole drama is played out in Valleys or the vales of the west which matches the topography of the area we have been investigating since the beginning of this expose and are clearly the valleys and rivers running off southern Dartmoor. This is the area known as ‘Vennshire’ in the Charter signed by Edward the Confessor for the Monks of Mont-Saint-Michel, bestowing  the Island called ‘St. Michael by the sea’ and this entire area south of Dartmoor....... but we will get to that later.

‘She followeth him weeping, and pointeth out to him the Valleys of Camelot and the castles that were shut in by combes and mountains, and the broad meadow-lands and the forest that girded them about.’

 The forest which is so prevalent throughout the text would have enshrouded the whole Southern peninsula as a forested belt from Dartmouth round to Plymouth in the Dark ages, bordered by the coastline meadows to the south and the moors to the north.

‘She hath ridden so far of her journeys that she is come to the Valley of Camelot, and seeth her mother's castle that was surrounded of great rivers, and seeth Perceval, that was alighted under the shadow of a tree at the top of the forest in order that he might behold his mother's castle.’

 Devon is renowned for its red soil.

Gildas (Concerning the Ruin and Conquest of Britain) says at this time the king of the Summer Region (i. e., Somerset) was Melwas, who had wickedly abducted Guinevere, the wife of King Arthur, and had brought her to his fortress at Glastonbury Tor, an invulnerable position because of 'the fortifications of thickets of reed, river and marsh.'
We know from various other accounts that the land around the tor flooded at times, but there are no references to ships visiting and no beaches. It seems incredible how the Glastonbury establishment found it so easy to convince so many into thinking Avalon was synonymous with Glastonbury tor. But we have already traced the progression of this myth through the writings of Glastonbury chroniclers.
 We have a Knight from the ‘Red Launde’ and a 'Lord of the Moors' who feature in this rich Perlesvaus text which unintentionally divulges the real location.

This story telleth how he conquered him and by what means, and how Galobrus of the Red Launde came to King Arthur's court to help Lancelot, for that he was of his lineage. This story is right long and right adventurous and weighty, but the book will now forthwith be silent thereof until another time.

The View of the entrance to Salcombe harbour with the red land to the left within the vales of Devon


If Glastonbury became synonymous with Arthur’s kingdom, it is only through occasional sentences such as this:

‘for King Arthur sendeth me in quest of him, and Lancelot hath also gone to seek him in another part of the kingdom of Logres’.

 Again we are made to assume that the story has its authority of a Josephus as a narrator, rather than the real authority of Joseph of Arimathea:

‘And all these adventures that you hear in this high record came to pass, Josephus tells us, for the setting forward the law of the Saviour’.

Of the most Holy Graal here beginneth another branch in such wise as the authority witnesseth and Joseph that made recoverance thereof, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

 It is almost as if the whole fable is designed so that subconsciously one makes the necessary connections to figure out who is who. Even where the narrator is concerned as being exterior to the textual content, this supposedly unknown source (which is consistenly appealed to as the ultimate authority), bears the same appellation as the only Joseph who could have supplied the account of the Grail’s arrival, but Joseph now becomes a separated persona from the Fisher king.

‘and he came, as you have heard, of the most holy lineage of Josephus and the good King Fisherman’.

‘Josephus recordeth us by this evil king that was so traitorous and false and yet was of the lineage of the Good Soldier Joseph of Abarimacie. This Joseph, as the scripture witnesseth, was his uncle, and this evil king was brother-german of King Fisherman, and brother of the good King Pelles that had abandoned his land, in order that he might serve God, and brother of the Widow Lady that was Perceval's mother, the most loyal that was ever in Great Britain. All these lineages were in the service of Our Lord from the beginning of their lives unto the end, save only this evil King that perished, so evilly as you have heard’.

The Geneology is a can of worms...... probably not originally, but through the oral transference from memory which would pay less attention to the accuracy of relationship and more to the actions carried out by the various characters.

It must not be forgotten that Melkin has seen the Shroud and encrypted its nature by refering to it as the ‘duo fassula’ in his English prophecy, but throughout the Perlesvaus, icons change situations. For instance, the Perilous chapel shape shifts as the Grail chapel or the tower amongst other appellations and changes in location, but  also the Shroud is mentioned in many ways. Nowhere is the text ever explicit in saying that the body over which the image on the cloth was formed is now in England.

"Sir," she says, "I have made vow thereof, and moreover a holy hermit hath told me that the knight that makes war upon us may not be overcome by another knight, except that I bring him some of the cloth wherewith the altar in the chapel of the Grave-yard Perilous is covered. The cloth is of the most holiest, for our Lord God was covered therewith in the Holy Sepulchre, on the third day when He came back from death to life.

The Last mention of the shroud being in the Gopels.

Next we have one of the only connections with the 'Lady chapel' at Glastonbury that are made through the Grail chapel existing on an island and also paying respect to his sweet mother or ‘Our lady’ that associates with the ‘virginem adorandam’ as being synonymous with the Lady chapel. This we know was latterly dedicated to conform with Grail descriptions and comply with Melkin's prophecy.

 ‘The damsel signs herself of the cross and commends her to the Saviour and to His sweet Mother. She looks before her to the head of the grave-yard, and sees the chapel, small and ancient. She hits her mule with her whip, and comes toward it and gets off. She entered within and found a great brightness of light. Within was an image of Our Lady, to whom she prays right sweetly that She will preserve her senses and her life and enable her to depart in safety from this perilous place.’

‘But or ever the King departed he made the head be brought into the Isle of Avalon, to a chapel of Our Lady that was there, where was a worshipful holy hermit that was well loved of Our Lord.’

‘He cutteth off the half of the cloth wherein he is enshrouded, and the coffin beginneth to make a crashing so passing loud that it seemed the chapel were falling. When he hath the piece of the cloth and the sword, he closeth the coffin again, and forthwith cometh to the door of the chapel.’

 

‘He was named Ahuret the Bastard," saith the knight; "And he had but one arm and one hand, and the other was smitten off at a castle that Messire Gawain gave Meliot of Logres when he succoured him against this knight that lieth in the coffin. And Meliot of Logres hath slain the knight that had assieged the castle, but the knight wounded him sore, so that he may not be whole save he have the sword wherewith he wounded him, that lieth in the coffin at his side, and some of the cloth wherein he is enshrouded; and, so God grant me to meet one of the knights, gladly will I convey unto him the damsel's message.’

 

The cloth is prevalent throughout in many places, but the point of the stories which obviously came from Melkin, seems to be to mention the Icons like the tomb, above which a chapel was built, the Grail which is Jesus’ coffin, the shroud, the sepulchre with an unknown occupant, Joseph of Arimathea and the royal line that stems from him. Really, the intended purport is to subtly intonate the widow as Mary Magdalene and the following bloodline. Never at any time does Melkin directly say anything to confute the Roman dogma of a resurrected body by implying that the Grail is the body of Jesus or that the Widow or Queen of Maidens was either Jesus' mother or his wife.

 

‘You are her affiance and her succour, and therefore ought you to remember that the good knight Joseph of Abarimacie, that took down your Body when it hung upon the rood, was her own uncle. Better loved he to take down your Body than all the gold and all the fee that Pilate might give him. Lord, good right of very truth had he so to do, for he took you in his arms beside the rood, and laid your Body in the holy sepulchre, wherein were you covered of the sovran cloth for the which have I come in hither.’

‘Josephus telleth us of a truth, that never did none enter into the chapel that might touch the cloth save only this one damsel.’

‘For the good King Fisherman is dead that made every day our service be done in the most holy chapel there where the most Holy Graal every day appeared, and where the Mother of God abode from the Saturday until the Monday that the service was finished. And now has the King of Castle Mortal seized the castle in such sort that never since then has the Holy Graal appeared, and all the other hallows are hidden, so that none knoweth what hath become of the priests that served in the chapel, nor the twelve ancient knights, nor the damsels that were therein.’

 Photo taken from the top of Burgh Island

As for the geographical location of Avalon as an Island by the sea…… it is expressed not only in the prophecy of Melkin itself ‘Marmore’, but by the various descriptions in the High History. Each branch has its own twist, but the island of Avalon is tidal, by the sea, with beaches, to which sea going vessels frequent, and is situated on the headland of an area full of valleys.

 

‘Perceval is far from land so that he seeth nought but sea only, and the ship speedeth onward, and God guideth him, as one that believeth in Him and loveth Him and serveth Him of a good heart. The ship ran on by night and by day as it pleased God, until that they saw a castle and an island of the sea. He asked his pilot if he knew what castle it was. "Certes," saith he, "Not I, for so far have we run that I know not neither the sea nor the stars." They come nigh the castle, and saw four that sounded bells at the four corners of the town, right sweetly, and they that sounded them were clad in white garments. They are come thither.’

‘So soon as the ship had taken haven under the castle, the sea withdraweth itself back, so that the ship is left on dry land. None were therein save Perceval, his horse, and the pilot. They issued forth of the ship and went by the side of the sea toward the castle, and therein were the fairest halls and the fairest mansions that any might see ever.’

‘I saw the Graal," saith the Master, "or ever Joseph, that was uncle to King Fisherman, collected therein the blood of Jesus Christ. Know that well am I acquainted with all your lineage, and of what folk you were born. For your good knighthood and for your good cleanness and for your good valour came you in hither, for such was Our Lord's will, and take heed that you be ready when place shall be, and time shall come, and you shall see the ship apparelled.’

 

"Sir," saith he to Messire Gawain, "I am the King for whom you slew the giant, whereby you had the sword wherewith St. John was beheaded, that I see on this altar. I made baptize me before you and all those of my kingdom, and turn to the New Law, and thereafter I went to a hermitage by the sea, far from folk, where I have been of a long space. I rose one night at matins and looked under my hermitage and saw that a ship had taken haven there. I went thither when the sea was retreated, and found within the ship three priests and their clerks, that told me their names and how they were called in baptism.

 

We should also be aware of how often the word rich is used in the text and in regards to castles and objects and clothing and tombs etc...... this most probably by foreign trade in tin. Robert de Boron however has  'Rich Fishermen' and Bron has the title Rich Fisher King. It is all fairly indecipherable as regards to how characters interrelate, but I think the fact that the Fisher king dies in the Perlesvaus reflects the death of Joseph of Arimathea and the commencement of family quarrels.

The Pilchard inn on Burgh Island.

'All along the valley thereof was great plenty of everything continually, and nought was ever lacking in the rich castle that Perceval had won'.
          

 As we know the Pilchards were plentiful even in Pytheas' time and the 'Plenty' that surrounds the Island, could refer to the fishing or tin. The river valley today abounds in fish, mussels and oysters. We know they are at the Grail castle and in the tin district of Devon by the fabrication of Bells that causes much wonderment elsewhere in the text, but it is the forested land of the vales, south of Dartmoor, that provides the backdrop for many of the encounters.

She departeth from the castle and goeth the speediest she may toward the Valleys of Camelot. 

 She followeth him weeping, and pointeth out to him the Valleys of Camelot and the castles that were shut in by combes and mountains, and the broad meadow-lands and the forest that girded them about.'

 

 Figure 68a. The combes of Devon and the various river valleys of the area described as the vales of Avalon or Vaus d'Avaron.

The description of a journey leaving the forest as they enter onto the uninhabited moors is just one example:

‘They were right well lodged the night and lay in the hold until the morrow, when they departed thence, and rode right busily on their journeys until they came into a very different land, scarce inhabited of any folk, and found a little castle in a combe’.

 The coffin, tomb or sepulchre features heavily as an icon throughout the various branches:

......and how none might know yet who lay in the coffin until such time as the Best Knight of the world should come thither, but that then should it be known. Perceval would fain have passed by the chapel, but the damsel says to him: "Sir, no knight passes hereby save he go first to see the coffin within the chapel.’

 ‘He showeth them the tomb of King Fisherman, and telleth them that none had set the tabernacle there above the coffin, but only the commandment of Our Lord, and he showeth them a rich pall that is upon the coffin, and telleth them that every day they see a new one there not less rich than is this one. King Arthur looketh at the sepulchre and saith that never before hath he seen none so costly. A smell issueth therefrom full delicate and sweet of savour. The King sojourneth in the castle and is highly honoured, and beholdeth the richesse and the lordship and the great abundance that is everywhere in the castle, insomuch that therein is nought wanting that is needful for the bodies of noble folk’.

‘For otherwise never would the coffin have opened, nor would any have known who he is that you now see openly.’

‘She makes her chaplain take certain letters that were sealed with gold in the coffin. He looks thereat and reads, and then says that these letters witness of him that lies in the coffin that he was one of them that helped to un-nail Our Lord from the cross. They looked beside him and found the pincers all bloody wherewith the nails were drawn, but they might not take them away, nor the body, nor the coffin, according as Josephus tells us, for as soon as Perceval was forth of the chapel, the coffin closed again and joined together even as it was before’.

‘About a couple of bowshots above the bridge (the tidal causeway) was a chapel fashioned like the one at Camelot, wherein was a sepulchre, and none knew who lay therein’.

He goeth forth and findeth the bridges broad and long, and goeth his way a great pace beside a great river that runneth in the midst of the valley.


 the first bridge is a bowshot in length and in breadth not more than a foot. Strait seemeth the bridge and the water deep and swift and wide. He knoweth not what he may do, for it seemeth him that none may pass it, neither afoot nor on horse’.

The bridge which disappears as one looks back on the way to the Grail Chapel and which Gawain crosses on his way to the Grail Castle is called the ‘pont de l’Anguile’. This could have been Melkin’s appelation for the bridge of the 'Angel island' or 'Ange Ile', but whatever way it is construed or embellished as being more than one; it was originally the sand causeway. It was probably Melkin himself who obscured this detail because as we know, it was him that has obscured this entire area from being recognised until now.

‘Thereupon, lo you, a knight that issueth forth of the castle and cometh as far as the head of the bridge, that was called the Bridge of the Eel, and shouteth aloud: "Sir Knight, pass quickly before it shall be already night, for they of the castle are awaiting us."
"Ha," saith Messire Gawain, "Fair sir, but teach me how I may pass hereby."
"Certes, Sir Knight, no passage know I to this entrance other than this, and if you desire to come to the castle, pass on without misgiving."
Messire Gawain hath shame for that he hath stayed so long, and forthinketh him of this that the Hermit told him, that of no mortal thing need he be troubled at the entrance of the castle, and therewithal that he is truly confessed of his sins, wherefore behoveth him be the less adread of death. He crosseth and blesseth himself and commendeth himself to God as he that thinketh to die, and so smiteth his horse with his spurs and findeth the bridge wide and large as soon as he goeth forward, for by this passing were proven most of the knights that were fain to enter therein. Much marvelled he that he found the bridge so wide that had seemed him so narrow’.

Sand ‘eels’ are still dug up for bait on the beach below the island at low tide and the size of the bridge is ever changing.

 

Thereupon the Widow Lady ariseth up and her daughter likewise, and they go over the bridge of the castle and see Messire Gawain that was yet looking on the coffin within the chapel.

The bridge, seems to be thin and then get wider which possibly is the analogy of the tidal causeway to the island, but again, back to the coffin that is ever prevalent throughout:

‘The Widow Lady had made bear thither the body that lay in the coffin before the castle of Camelot in the rich chapel that she had builded there. His sister brought the cerecloth that she took in the Waste Chapel, and presented there where the Graal was. Perceval made bring the coffin of the other knight that was at the entrance of his castle within the chapel likewise, and place it beside the coffin of his uncle, nor never thereafter might it be removed. Josephus telleth us that Perceval was in this castle long time, nor never once moved therefrom in quest of no adventure; rather was his courage so attorned to the Saviour of the World and His sweet Mother, that he and his sister and the damsel that was therein led a holy life and a religious.’

A 'cerecloth' is a waxed or oiled cloth used for covering bodies but uncannily by adding a ‘d’ which, surely given Melkin’s penchant for subliminal information, would have been a ‘cedre’ cloth or cedar cloth, especially as we are informed it was sweet smelling.

 He beholdeth the sepulchre, that was right fair, and forthwith the sepulchre openeth and the corners parted and the stone lifts up in such wise that a man might see the knight that lay within, of whom came forth a smell of so sweet savour that it seemed to the good men that were looking on that it had been all embalmed. They found a letter which testified that this knight was named Josephus.’

In this instance the tomb is Joseph’s, even though no one knows who is in it. One can witness how things have got so mixed up that the narrator who is supposedly Josephus is now synoymous with Joseph of Arimathea. The smell of the coffin that is remarked upon many times in the text, is the embalming cedar oil that the Grail ark contained. As always, in the text, the coffin ‘who no one knew who was inside’, is said to contain Joseph the Fisher king or the son of Arthur a knight, but never Jesus. One of the branches features two coffins which indicates it was after Joseph of Arimathea's death.

 

‘At the tomb shall we be well able to see whether it be he!"
They go to the chapel right speedily, and Messire Gawain seeth them coming and alighteth. "Lady, saith he, "Welcome may you be, you and your company."
The Lady answereth never a word until that they are come to the tomb. When she findeth it not open she falleth down in a swoon. And Messire Gawain is sore afraid when he seeth it.’

 

‘The coffin was rich and the tabernacle costly and loaded of precious stones. And the priests and knights bear witness that as soon as the body was placed in the coffin and they were departed thence, they found on their return that it was covered by the tabernacle all dight as richly as it is now to be seen, nor might they know who had set it there save only the commandment of Our Lord’.

 ‘She followeth him weeping, and pointeth out to him the Valleys of Camelot and the castles that were shut in by combes and mountains, and the broad meadow-lands and the forest that girded them about.’

 When considering Arthur’s Kingdom, it does, (as we have maintained before), seem to cover the whole extent West of Saxon Wessex. So Cardoil was Tintagel in Cornwall which also doubled as the court of Camelot as well as the Folly Hill Camelot where the Widows castle was situated and the ‘Fu venuz de vers Carlion / Li rois Artus et tenu ot / Cort molt riche a Camaalot’, from Chrétien, provided the link to Caerleon of South Wales for the Welsh protagonists and polemisists.

 Could it be that Master Blihis, wrote the Perlesvaus before Chrétien de Troyes? Most scholars think that the Perlesvaus is the continuation of Chrétien de Troyes unfinished ‘Perceval, the Story of the Grail’, but what is more likely is they were both using Melkin’s book or common troubadour sources. This next excerpt shows that the descriptions are relatively accurate because this is still how Tintagel looks today.

 They came thitherward and saw that the enclosure of the castle was sunk down into an abysm, so that none might approach it on that side, but it had a right fair gateway and a door tall and wide whereby one entered. They beheld a chapel that was right fair and rich, and below was a great ancient hall. They saw a priest appear in the midst of the castle, bald and old, that had come forth of the chapel. They are come thither and alighted, and asked the priest what the castle was, and he told them that it was the great Tintagel. "Damsel," saith he, "My name is Arthur, and I am of Tincardoil."

Arthur and Lancelot have heard the tidings, there will they be. He goeth thitherward as fast as he may, and as straight, and scarce hath he ridden away or ever he met a squire that seemed right weary, and his hackney sore worn of the way. Messire Gawain asked him whence he came, and the squire said to him. "From the land of King Arthur, where is great war toward, for that none knoweth not what hath become of him. Many folk go about saying that he is dead, for never since that he departed from Cardoil, and Messire Gawain and Lancelot with him, have no tidings been heard of him; and he left the Queen at Cardoil to take his place, and also on account of her son's death, and the most part say that he is dead.
 

‘The knights that may not leave Cardoil lest Briant of the Isles should seize the city, they sent me to the kingdom of Logres.’

But Camelot was not at Tintagel and the Grail was not there, but on an Island near the other Camelot. As we have discussed already the inclusion of Camelot in the story is solely its connection as ‘Shirei ha Ma'a lot’.  Thus the unsure nature of the meaning of the word becoming a place, but through trying to rationalise this misunderstanding, it ended up having two different locations. It was Melkin who had included the occult material from the Hebrew texts found in the tomb which had been brought by Joseph,(Grades to the Temple), but the deeper meaning of the ascension of the steps to the temple eventually was portrayed as the quest for the Grail itself.

 "Sir," saith Lancelot to the King, "So it please you, and Messire Gawain be willing, I will go back toward Cardoil, and help to defend your land to the best I may, for sore is it discounselled, until such time as you shall be come from the Graal."

 

 Here the Graal at the Camelot opposite Avalon is plainly different from the Cardoil of Tintagel.
The central theme and many accessory episodes are similar to   Chrètien’s Perceval and its first two continuations. However the story of the Chess board is elongated in Gautier’s continuation of Perceval, but barely mentioned in Perlesvaus, the Welsh text making no mention of the board. How this allusion to the chess board fits in,(thinking historically) as it is not just an arbitrary icon, is not clear; unless in the subliminal sense the chess board originally in the book of the Grail was alluding to the valleys of Avaron as the board where Kings, Queens, Holy men(Bishops), Knights and Castles, (which all the grail literature incorporates) was somehow incorporated in some misunderstood sense as part of the story from its original potent meaning.
Chrètien’s exemption could be for many reasons, but Gautier’s embellishment does imply the Perlesvaus as primary and of equal or older than Chrètien. I think that Henry heard much of his Grail material in the court circles of France as a youngster and may have put alot of material together from memory. It would seem that in the end the Grail which may have moved from the Island at one time and was located in a chapel above ground was in the end secreted due to outside and family feuds.

He hath won the land that belonged to good King Fisherman from the evil King of Castle Mortal, that did away thence the good believe, and therefore was it that the Graal was hidden.

At what stage after Joseph's arrival these feuds appear is not certain, as all the characters seem so interchangeable along with how they are related, but the offspring of the Holy family are concerned with the guardianship of the Grail and known as Grail Keepers.
 Even Dugdale's account who follows the Glastonbury tradition seems to think St. Philip is responsible for 'Despatching' Joseph. This however could be of a later tradition where Joseph leaves Sarras (Avalon) and goes off to Proselytise. Even though Dugdale thinks the Island he refers to is Glastonbury he confirms the Small Island which by the time he wrote had become synonymous with Glastonbury Tor : " About sixty-three years after the Incarnation of our Lord, St. Joseph of Arimathea, accompanied by eleven other disciples of St. Philip, was despatched by that Apostle into Britain, to introduce in the place of barbarous and bloody rites, long exercised by the bigotted and besotted druids, the meek and gentle system of Christianity. They succeeded in obtaining from Arviragus, the British king, permission to settle in a small island………”

William of Malmesbury also tells us how Joseph of Arimathea was sent over by St. Philip, and how a king of Britain, whom he does not name, gave Joseph and his companions the island called Ynyswitryn, where, by admonition of the Archangel Gabriel appearing to him in a vision, he built a chapel which he dedicated to the Virgin.  This Island originally had been called Sarras or Avalon.  William, however, makes no allusion to the Graal, Josephes, Mordrains, and Sarras or to Lancelot or Gawain, or even to the prophecy of Melkin.  Obviously (as we have discussed previously), he thinks any other tradition about Joseph bringing with him holy relics i.e the Graal is a frivolous invention and basically just associates the old church with Joseph but omits to inform us of whole legend of Joseph. It is mainly Williams omission of a reference to Melkin's prophecy on which most scholars base their  assumption that it must be of a later invention. This presumption of course has been added to with such trite pronouncements upon 'Abbadare', 'saphat' and the Baybars having an eastern connection..... when the prophecy itself is so obviously concerned with its subject... which is clearly the Island of Avalon.  How modern scholarship has made this contrived drivel stick and supposedly prove that Melkin and his prophecy was of a later invention is a curious mirroring of the earlier contrivances carried out by Glastonbury chroniclers. This is especially true when we consider  Glastonbury chroniclers themselves attesting he was a geometer and his Geometry locates an island with stunning geometrical precision. We will assess in a moment the source of this misdirection by modern scholarship which is mainly derived from a publication known as ' Melkin the Bard and Esoteric tradition at Glastonbury Abbey' in the Downside review.

However, William Of Malmesbury gives short shrift to Arthur and does not want to mention Sarras or Avalon because of its connection with what he believes to be fabalized Graal material. After Arthur's last battle he was brought for the most part down the Tamar as Geoffrey of Monmouth portrays and this account seems to have come from Melkin directly as Geoffreys' "very ancient book". 

Illuc post bellum Camblani vulnere lesum duximus Arcturum nos conducente Barintho, equora cui fuerant et celi sydera nota. Hoc rectore ratis cum principe venimus illuc, et nos quo decuit Morgen suscepit honore, inque suis talamis posuit super aurea regem fulcra manuque sibi detexit vulnus honesta inspexitque diu, tandemque redire salute posse sibi dixit, si secum tempore longo esset et ipsius vellet mendicamine fungi. Gaudentes igitur regem commisimus illi et dedimus ventis redeundo vela secundis.

 

‘To that place after the battle of Camblan we brought Arthur, hurt by wounds, with Barinthus leading us, to whom the waters and the stars of the sky were known. With this guide for our raft we came to that place with our leader, and with what was fitting Morgan did honor to us, and in her rooms she placed the king upon a golden couch and with her own honourable hand she uncovered his wound and inspected it for a long time, and at last she said that health could return to him, if he were with her for a long time and wished to undergo her treatment. Therefore rejoicing we committed the king to her and returning gave sails to the assisting winds.’

Wherever Geoffrey of Monmouth obtained his account from, he surely would not have envisaged Glastonbury as the place where Arthur was sailed to, when he was wounded.   What we can understand is that Avalon was a remote location and he was left there to try to heal (maybe hoping miraculous assistace, given who is buried there) and this is how all the rumours started, as only a few knew where he was. Obviously he did not survive and was buried on the island as the story goes, alongside Guinevere and the other illustrious occupants.

Probably derived from the same source (Melkin) as to Arthur’s destination after the battle of Camlann is Thomas Malory’s account in his Morte D'Arthur as seen here in this short exerpt:
 

‘Now put me into that barge,’ seyde the kynge.
And so he ded sofftely, and there resceyved hym three ladyes
with grete mournyng. And so they sette hem downe, and in one
of their lappis kyng Arthure layde hys hede. And then the quene seyde,
“A, my dere brothir! Why have ye taryed so longe frome me?
Alas, thys wounde on youre hede hath caught overmuch coulde!"
And anone they rowed fromward the londe, and sir Bedyvere
behylde all tho ladyes go frowarde hym. Than sir Bedwere cryed
and seyde,
“A, my lorde Arthur, what shall becom of me, now ye go frome
me and leve me here alone amonge myne enemyes?”
“Comforte thyselff,” seyde the kynge, “and do as well as thou
mayste, for in me ys no truste for to truste in. For I must into the
vale of Avylyon to hele me of my grevous wounde. And if thou
here nevermore of me, pray for my soule!”
But ever the quene and ladyes wepte and shryked, that hit was
pité to hyre. And as sone as sir Bedwere had loste the
syght of the barge he wepte and wayled, and so toke the foreste
and wente all that nyght. (Malory, Vinaver edition p. 716).

It is probably due to accounts that had the Queen living at the advent of Arthur's death, that we get the whole 'Second wife' scenario from Glastonbury, as earlier material had the king buried alonside Guinevere who had died previously. 

Both Goeffrey’s account('sed et inclytus Arturus letalier vulneratus est,qui… ad sananda vulnera sua in insulam avalloniam evectus') given around 1138 and this one from Malory probably stem from an entry in the tenth century Annales Cambriae under the year 539 which states in a matter of fact way that Arthur and Mordred fell in the Battle of Camlann. Even by 1150 the Vita Merlini relating that Arthur was taken to Avalon refers to Avalon as Insula pomorum which shows that at this early date...... the change of location of Avalon was already a transformation in progress.

We hear in the Perlesvaus that before Arthur’s death, Guinevere was buried in Avalon.......   and thus the necessity to include her presence into the fabrication of Arthur’s disinterment at Glastonbury.

 ‘There were three hermits therewithin that had sung their vespers, and came over against Lancelot. They bowed their heads to him and he saluted them, and then asked of them what place was this? And they told him that the place there was Avalon. They make stable his horse. He left his arms without the chapel and entereth therein, and saith that never hath he seen none so fair nor so rich. There were within three other places, right fair and seemly dight of rich cloths of silk and rich corners and fringes of gold. He seeth the images and the crucifixes all newly fashioned, and the chapel illumined of rich colours; and moreover in the midst thereof were two coffins, one against the other, and at the four corners four tall wax tapers burning, that were right rich, in four right rich candlesticks. The coffins were covered with two pails, and there were clerks that chanted psalms in turn on the one side and the other.’

"Sir," says Lancelot to one of the hermits, "For whom were these coffins made?" "For King Arthur and Queen Guenievre." "King Arthur is not yet dead," says Lancelot.

"No, in truth, please God! but the body of the Queen lies in the coffin before us and in the other is the head of her son, until such time as the King shall be ended, unto whom God grant long life! But the Queen bade at her death that his body should be set beside her own when he shall end. Hereof have we the letters and her seal in this chapel, and this place made she be builded new on this wise or ever she died."  But no semblant of grief durst he make other than such as might not be perceived, and right great comfort to him was it that there was an image of Our Lady at the head of the coffin.’

 Here we have the evidence that the queen is buried in Avalon (which is next to one of the Camelot's) and king Arthur is off to Tintagel (the other Camelot).

'Of Meliot the story is here silent, and saith that King Arthur and Messire Gawain have ridden so far that they are come into the Isle of Avalon, there where the Queen lieth. They lodge the night with the hermits, that made them right great cheer. But you may well say that the King is no whit joyful when he seeth the coffin where the Queen lieth and that wherein the head of his son lieth. Thereof is his dole renewed, and he saith that this holy place of this holy chapel ought he of right to love better than all other places on earth. They depart on the morrow when they have heard mass. The King goeth the quickest he may toward Cardoil’…..,

 

‘The King sojourned at Cardoil of a long space. He believed in God and His sweet Mother right well. He brought thither from the castle where the Graal was the pattern whereby chalices should be made, and commanded make them throughout all the land so as that the Saviour of the world should be served more worshipfully. He commanded also that bells be cast throughout his land after the fashion of the one he had brought, and that each church should have one according to the means thereof. This much pleased the people of his kingdom, for thereby was the land somewhat amended.’

Josephus telleth us that as at this time was there no bell neither in Greater Britain nor in Lesser; but folk were called together by a horn, and in many places there were sheets of steel, and in other places clappers of wood. King Arthur marvelled him much of this sound, so clear and sweet was it, and it well seemed him that it came on God's behalf, and right fain was he to see a bell and so he might.

Here we witness the advent of Bells made presumably of bronze.  In this era, the copper mines of Dartmoor were in full production and this might well have been some of the reason that the Monks of Mont-Saint-Michel so craved the area of Venn which they cajoled Edward the Confessor to hand over to them before the Norman conquest. Although tin is not mentioned in the Charter it might be a reason for part of the mix up in misidentifying St. Michael's Mount in Cornwall with their intended goal of 'St Michael by the sea' which we will show later was Burgh Island. The tin and copper were highly sought after later in Medieval times across Europe for bell making.

We can see here that the Camelot of the Queen of Maidens or the Widow’s castle of the Folly hill site, (which we know was in sight of the Island of Avalon) is overlooking the chapel on the Island. Also on the Island is the same house of religion or monastery attested to have been on Burgh island at one time and later was to become known as ‘St. Michael by the sea’.

‘His mother remained long time, and his sister, at Camelot, and led a good life and a holy. The lady made make a chapel right rich about the sepulchre that lay by the forest and Camelot, and had it adorned of rich vestments, and established a chaplain that should sing mass there every day. Since then has the place been so builded up as that there is an abbey there and folk of religion, and many bear witness that there it is still, right fair.’

The Abbey is obviously synonymous with the rumoured monastic buildings of which no trace persists from the sixth century. As mentioned before the more recent St. Michael chapel leaves no physical trace either yet this is attested to by Camden and others. The head of the forest where Avalon existed when the forest flourished... is the same as the island that exists at the head of hazardous tides. Those who have preferred to associate Avalon with Glastonbury and have translated the word for 'tides' as 'moors'.i.e 'At the head of the moors adventurous'  need to question where the moors are located and ought to watch this link to understand the reference to 'Hazardous Tides' in relation to Avalon. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRAyaxw2CIs
 

‘They rode until they came to the head of the forest and caught sight of the sea that was nigh enough before them, and saw that there was a great clashing of arms at the brink of the sea. A single knight was doing battle with all them that would fain have entered into a ship, and held stour so stiffly against them that he toppled the more part into the sea. They went thither as fast as they might, and when they drew nigh to the ship they knew that it was Perceval by his arms and his shield. Or ever they reached it, the ship was put off into the midst of the sea, wherein he was launched of his own great hardiment, and they went on fighting against him within the ship.

 

The Island of Avalon in Bigbury Bay.

It seems that in the end, reading between the lines, that most of the holy family that were the offspring of either Joseph or Mary Magdalene were also buried in the same vault under the Grail chapel.  From thereafter, because the rich and varied transformations of the characters, the icons and the geographical references that became so intermingled……… the Island of Avalon became not a part of history, but a part of Legend.

 There are so many references to that which we have posited, which seem to be subliminally indicating Mary Magdalene buried Jesus in Britain.

The Widow Lady had made bear thither the body that lay in the coffin before the castle of Camelot in the rich chapel that she had builded there. His sister brought the cerecloth that she took in the Waste Chapel, and presented there where the Graal was. Perceval made bring the coffin of the other knight that was at the entrance of his castle within the chapel likewise, and place it beside the coffin of his uncle, nor never thereafter might it be removed. Josephus telleth us that Perceval was in this castle long time, nor never once moved therefrom in quest of no adventure; rather was his courage so attorned to the Saviour of the World and His sweet Mother, that he and his sister and the damsel that was therein led a holy life and a religious. Therein abode they even as it pleased God, until that his mother passed away and his sister and all they that were therein save he alone. The hermits that were nigh the castle buried them and sang their masses, and came every day and took counsel of him for the holiness they saw him do and the good life that he led there. So one day whilst he was in the holy chapel where the hallows were, forthwith, behold you, a Voice that cometh down therein: "Perceval," saith the Voice, "Not long shall you abide herein; wherefore it is God's will that you dispart the hallows amongst the hermits of the forest, there where these bodies shall be served and worshipped, and the most Holy Graal shall appear herein no more, but within a brief space shall you know well the place where it shall be."

 

When the Voice departed, all the coffins that were therein crashed so passing loud that it seemed the master-hall had fallen. He crosseth and blesseth him and commendeth him to God. On a day the hermits came to him. He disparted the holy relics among them, and they builded above them holy churches and houses of religion that are seen in the lands and in the islands. Joseus the son of King Hermit, remained therein with Perceval, for he well knew that he would be departing thence betimes.

 

Perceval heard one day a bell sound loud and high without the manor toward the sea. He came to the windows of the hall and saw the ship come with the white sail and the Red Cross thereon, and within were the fairest folk that ever he might behold, and they were all robed in such manner as though they should sing mass. When the ship was anchored under the hall they went to pray in the most holy chapel. They brought the richest vessels of gold and silver that any might ever see, like as it were coffins, and set therein one of the three bodies of knights that had been brought into the chapel, and the body of King Fisherman, and of the mother of Perceval. But no savour in the world smelleth so sweet. Perceval took leave of Joseus and commended him to the Saviour of the World, and took leave of the household, from whom he departed in like manner. The worshipful men that were in the ship signed them of the cross and blessed them likewise. The ship wherein Perceval was drew far away, and a Voice that issued from the manor as she departed commended them to God and to His sweet Mother. Josephus recordeth us that Perceval departed in such wise, nor never thereafter did no earthly man know what became of him, nor doth the history speak of him more. But the history telleth us that Joseus abode in the castle that had been King Fisherman's, and shut himself up therein so that none might enter, and lived upon that the Lord God might send him. He dwelt there long time after that Perceval had departed, and ended therein. After his end, the dwelling began to fall. Natheless never was the chapel wasted nor decayed, but was as whole thereafter as tofore and is so still. The place was far from folk, and the place seemed withal to be somewhat different. When it was fallen into decay, many folk of the lands and islands that were nighest thereunto marvel them what may be in this manor. They dare a many that they should go see what was therein, and sundry folk went thither from all the lands, but none durst never enter there again save two Welsh knights that had heard tell of it. Full comely knights they were, young and joyous hearted. So either pledged him to other that they would go thither by way of gay adventure; but therein remained they of a long space after, and when again they came forth they led the life of hermits, and clad them in hair shirts, and went by the forest and so ate nought save roots only, and led a right hard life; yet ever they made as though they were glad, and if that any should ask whereof they rejoiced in such wise, "Go," said they to them that asked, "thither where we have been, and you shall know the wherefore.


The High History witnesseth us that when the conquest of the castle was over, the Saviour of the World was right joyous and well pleased thereof. The Graal presented itself again in the chapel, and the lance whereof the point bleedeth, and the sword wherewith St John was beheaded that Messire Gawain won, and the other holy relics whereof was right great plenty. For our Lord God loved the place much. The hermits went back to their hermitages in the forest and served Our Lord as they had been wont. Joseus remained with Perceval at the castle as long as it pleased him, but the Good Knight searched out the land there where the New Law had been abandoned and its maintenance neglected.

 

Here endeth the story of the most Holy Graal. Josephus, by whom it is placed on record, giveth the benison of Our Lord to all that hear and honour it. The Latin from whence this history was drawn into Romance was taken in the Isle of Avalon, in a holy house of religion that standeth at the head of the hazardous tide, there where King Arthur and Queen Guenievre lie, according to the witness of the good men religious that are therein, that have the whole history thereof, true from the beginning even to the end. After this same history beginneth the story how Briant of the Isles renounced King Arthur on account of Lancelot whom he loved not, and how he assured King Claudas that reft King Ban of Benoic of his land. This story telleth how he conquered him and by what means, and how Galobrus of the Red Launde came to King Arthur's court to help Lancelot, for that he was of his lineage. This story is right long and right adventurous and weighty, but the book will now forthwith be silent thereof until another time.’


 

 

Chapter17

Biblical Time and its relation to the Jews, in addition to the explanation of the relationship between St. Michael, Jesus and the Prophets.

So how did the original Jews arrive in Devon and Cornwall?  Judah the progenitor of the Jewish tribe had three sons, named Er, Onan and Shelah. The wife of Judah’s first born Er, was called Tamar, the name of the river dividing Devon and Cornwall.  However, Er, was judged by God for he “was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord slew him”. The Hebrew custom was, that his brother Onan, Judah’s second son, should dutifully produce an heir for his brother according to Mosaic Law: "Lie with your brother's wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother."  However, Onan while appearing to make the correct overtures, practised ‘coitus interruptus’ and never planned on having a child with Tamar,  especially when the ensuing offspring would not be accounted as his own household, but would instead, provide an heir who would potentially dilute his own inheritance upon Judah’s death.  Onan eventually died by God’s intervention and displeasure at his guile, while Tamar still remained without child.

Judah raised his son Shelah on his own since the death of his own Canaanite wife, and excused himself from putting him forward as his youngest son, saying that she should pass the time at her father’s house until Shelah came of eligible age to marry.  In a rather contrived plan Judah, witnessing that Tamar was still childless, while two of his sons who had married her were dead, was reticent to give his youngest son to that same woman, no doubt feeling that she was somewhat cursed.  Meanwhile Tamar, in all righteousness, wished to fulfil her duties according to Mosaic Law to bear progeny, but she had, up to that point, been thwarted by Judah, while probably suspecting his real intentions.  In order that she might fulfil her duty and carry on the Judaic line, she determined on another course of action, hatching a plan of her own to overcome the state of affairs.

It was believed by the Israelites at that time, having been prophesied by Jacob, that the Messiah was to come from Judah's offspring.  The Bible relates that Judah set out on a journey to shear his sheep in Timnah not very far away and while on route in a village called Enaim, he met what he thought was a prostitute, who in reality was a disguised and veiled Tamar.  Availing himself of her services, she found that he had not the wherewithal with which to pay for the comforts she provided, so Judah agreed to leave his seal and staff, to be redeemed at a later date, on delivery of a goat from his flock as final payment.

Judah then sent his friend Hiram, to retrieve his seal and staff and to settle his debt with the prostitute by delivering the goat. Hiram enquired and found that there was no prostitute in Enaim and nor was there any such person who provided such services in the vicinity. About three months later, news was given to Judah that Tamar had now become pregnant.  Secretly, Judah was relieved that this news would release him from the bond of duty to be performed by his youngest son Shelah.  However, indignantly he demanded that she come to be enquired of, so all may know who the man was who had bestowed upon her his seed. In front of her accusers, Tamar produced the missing pledges left behind by Judah. “By the man, whose these are, am I with child”, she declared to her detractors. Judah, pricked by his conscience opined, “She hath been more righteous than I, because I gave her not to Shelah my son”, admitting that she had done nothing unrighteous, by both the Mosaic Law and by custom.

This reaction by Judah does indicate that Tamar was in fact a Hebrew and not a Canaanite, for it was upon her instigation that she was able to fulfil that duty.  A Canaanite woman attempting the same ploy, posing as a prostitute, would have been accused of entrapment and prostitution.  Judah thereby declaring her innocence confirmed that Tamar was in fact a Hebrew and thus was accounted as blameless.  Jewish Midrash also conferring on her blamelessness in this ploy and righteousness in her actions.

Up to this point both Isaac and Jacob had passed on the holy seed from Abraham through Hebrew women, while Judah, having married a Canaanite woman, produced his three male heirs of impure heritage. Tamar, by having direct offspring from Judah had overcome this deviation from God's plan and the descendants from Abraham continued to be Hebrew.

The appellation ‘Hebrew’ in this instance is related to the name of the semi nomadic Habiru people, who are recorded in the Egyptian hieroglyphs of the 13th and 12th centuries BC as having settled and then eventually having come out of Egypt, this term often being synonymous with the Israelites in general.  The Hebrews are probably one and the same as the descendants of the biblical patriarch Eber son of Shelah,(not Judah’s son), a great grandson of Noah and an ancestor of Abraham later to be called the Habiru by the Egyptians.  Much later the term Hebrew becomes synonymous in general with the Jews (of Judah), rather than the Israelites who came out of Egypt.

The interesting part about the insert of this passage in Genesis 38 is that it has no relevance to the prior narrative or to that which follows it immediately afterward and appears to have come from a Babylonian source.  In fact, there is no relevant information about Tamar in the continuing story except for the fact that she was able to give birth to the twins, Pharez and Zerah.  The ensuing story related that the hand of Zerah (or Zarach) was apparently seen by the midwife as first at the birth of the twins and then the hand was retracted, having had a red ribbon tied to his wrist, to indicate who was the first to be seen exiting the womb.  Apparently Pharez was the first to exit the womb, having caused a breach at the birth, not allowing or effectively blocking Zerah from exiting first. According to the Midrash Rabbah, when Tamar’s pregnancy was well advanced to showing her size, she would tap upon her stomach and exclaim, ‘I am big with kings and redeemers’. (Genesis Rabbah 85:10)

Chroniclers trace Jesus’s genealogy back through David to the natural inheritor of Judah, Pharez being the eldest, from whom the Messiah, according to prophesy would descend.  Genealogy in the Bible can be interlaced with polemic, but one must be aware that passages interpolated into a flowing story have often been inserted for an ulterior motive and probably have a bearing on the veracity of a passage.  The other seemingly innocent information contained within the story about Zerah, (having been the first to break the womb with his hand), also seems to be utterly irrelevant, but pertinently, it establishes his birthright.

Pharez or Perez by Mathew’s genealogy was the ancestor of King David, while Ethiopian tradition also bestowed on him the title of the ‘father of the Persians’.  Tamar’s son Zerah is sometimes, confused with an Ethiopian or Cushite of the same name, most probably Osorkon II, the successor of Shishak on the throne of Egypt who, with a large army, invaded the kingdom of Judah in the days of Asa.  Chronologically this was not only wrong, but it established that there was little certainty as to what the Bible or the Torah was relating involving Zerah and his offspring or which of them was blessed with continuing the holy line, to become the ultimate successor to Judah.  Just as Judah was fourth in line to inherit after Ruben, Simeon and Levi, so too it could have been Cochol (calcol) the only one of Zerah’s progeny, on whom we  have no further information , nor certain knowledge of where his progeny might have settled.

The Genesis narrative also relates that Judah did not have further sexual relations with Tamar.  After being shamed and duped by Tamar, it would in all probability have made him disinclined to carry on a cohabiting relationship.

 Tamar, upon being spurned by Judah in all probability would have returned to her father's house to bring up her two children.

Tamar was twice the daughter-in-law of Judah, but now she was the mother of his two children and the matriarch of the Jews.  The Jews, as related by the Prophets, believed themselves to be the chosen race, which led to an attitude of entitlement and self-reassurance that caused arrogance and their rebellion against the will of God which eventually led to their downfall. Jews were brought up with a psychological advantage stemming from an entitled self-image, believing such prophecies in their scriptures that ‘ten men from the Nations’ would wish to be associated with a Jew because of their blessing as in Zechariah 8:23, In those days it shall come to pass that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying ‘We will go with you for we have heard that God is with you’.
It is evident that a Jew could be a person who dwelled in any nation and spoke any language. The prophets’ view of a Jew primarily is someone who lives the Law. Essentially a Jew today is anyone who has had peace conferred on them through spiritual growth and by the attainment of gnosis as described by in Isaiah 32:17 The fruit of righteousness will be peace; the effect of righteousness will be quietness and confidence forever. 18 My people will live in peaceful dwelling places, in secure homes, in undisturbed places of rest.

  This understanding of what constitutes a Jew, differs from the perception of a Jew held by the people who live in Israel today. God chose to carry out his work that it might be known and understood through the Jew’s history, he did not choose the Jews to be a genetical elite. To be accounted a Jew (as meant by the Prophets) is a Spiritual state and the dwelling is referring to a mental landscape based in consciousness rather than a geographical one, but the references in the prophets are entirely metaphorical for the views held by those locations in ‘Historical Time’ as recorded in the history book of the Jewish race.

 A Jew that the prophets speak to, belongs to a spiritual race from all the nations and languages and certainly has no affiliation with the present conflict of the Jews of Israel who today fight for a geographical location which has value no greater than any other region or city. In fact the fundamentalism which pervades the Jewish argument for their right to modern day Israel is based in a large part due to this sense of entitlement and the fact that to them the Torah has become a purely historical text with little appreciation of its substance being applicable to a wider Divine plan.

It was Jesus, who suggested that, “salvation is from the Jews” as he knew that the tribe of Judah was to be as a pattern upon which gnosis was to be attained and that only by submission to the Law (of which Judah was both progenitor of the tribe of the Jews which became the propagator of the Law), could this eventual attainment be arrived at.

A problem which is perpetuated in theology and in the Abrahamic religions in general, exists in the world today because of mankind's misunderstanding of what constitutes or defines a Jew. This is the underlying reason for much of the strife between nations which is so prevalent in the middle East. In Biblical prophetical literature, the Prophets speak of the Jews as those who follow a spiritual pattern (not consciously) and this pattern is based upon Jewish history. Why, the sceptic might ask should we presume or believe that the potential of Mankind is somehow revealed in the ancient texts of what were a small tribe in the middle East?  The answer would be that if there was a divine hand at play in the development of Mankind, by whatever means a proof might be established, when man is able to re-cognise it, that should be proof enough.

Who would be bold enough to assert that the God through whom the prophets spoke and of which the Bible recounts had chosen an inept or inadequate means of unveiling his work of divine intervention by the evidences left behind in a book that only trace the heritage of one tribe. It Is in this book and by the Prophets that we hear repeated 'And you shal Know that I am the Lord'.   Many might consider an Omnipotent God appealing on a broader scale, but the inadequacy of this view is that all the nations perceive him. It is the proofs of his Divine hand at work which are lacking and thus we have in the history of the Israelites and the words of the Prophets those proofs when they can be deciphered or grasped through the continual elevation of mans Consciousness. It is pertintent to remember the accusation against the way that Mankind thinks:
You turn things upside down, as if the potter were thought to be like the clay! Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, "He did not make me"? Can the pot say of the potter, "He knows nothing"?

Although there is only one God, (but by our perception many are attested to), the same God who led the Israelites out of Egypt seems like a good starting place to consider his hand in Mankind’s affairs, since virtually two thirds of mankind believe in this specific God. It was his choice of Judah above his brothers, that has caused a certain amount of envy among the rest of the brothers who constitute Israel, even though Judah’s offspring through the Davidic line has suffered greatly since their blessing. God had preferred and conferred on Jerusalem a special status in his work, the capital city of the Jews and the housing of his temple. This was the substance of the Jews sense of superiority over others and confidence in their own divine purpose for the most part, which originally stemmed from Jacob’s benediction to Judah:

‘Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father's children shall bow down before thee.

Judah is as a lion's cub; you went as my son after the prey, you brought it down and then couched as a lion; but as an old lion, who shall rouse you up?

The sceptre will not depart from Judah, nor a Lawgiver from between your feet, until Shiloh comes; to bring obedience to my people.

You will be tethered to the vine as an ass, and to the choicest vine as an ass’s son; your garments will be washed in wine, and your raiment will be the blood of grapes'.

There is always consistency in Prophecy throughout the bible and in this small extract, as with every sentence from Biblical prophetical literature, there is so much to be understood. The language of metaphor used throughout the prophets must be learnt before the meaning can be transliterated and intellectually understood. The one thing about the prophets is that several prophets may have related the same thing, to be spiritually understood in the future, but they would have done it from different aspects using different metaphor. Foreshadowing of what transpired historically as pertaining to God's Chosen people and their city of Jerusalem is the only viable way the elevated consciouness of New Jerusalem is to be re- cognised.  Theology, dogma and creeds are tools used by religion and do not for the most part represent the message that the prophets have left.  Judah here was inextricably linked to the law and was the tribe by which the Law was to be conveyed to mankind:

Genesis 49:10 The rod of authority will not be taken from Judah, and he will not be without a law-giver, till he comes who has the right to it. And also in Psalm 60:7 Judah is my law-giver.

It is worth noting the last line in Jacob’s benediction which is exemplary of a continuous metaphor and manifests the continuity of Prophecy. The language in metaphor here was that Judah is the vine, and the spirit of man is likened to an ass as it kicks against authority and is described often biblically as in Zechariah  9:9 and uses the same language of metaphor: shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

Jesus on his triumphal entry to Jerusalem staged this event as the Gospel writers indicate, as a confirmation that he was the awaited Messiah, yet he knew exactly what this prophetic metaphor meant, and still chose to stage it. He could hardly ride an ass and the colt of an ass and was well aware that this saying metaphorically related to the spirit of man as a rebellious ass being reborn as..... or giving birth to a colt, ‘the son of man’. This point depicts that man’s potential is to bear a son (not in the physical sense) and also that Jesus has the main role to play in this process.
Due to Man’s obvious link to the flesh, that which was implanted within us (the spirit) is continually contravened as a measure of correction  and the mixture of the weakness’s of the flesh has acted to corrupt what is essentially a correcting influence and rendered mankind rebellious and slow to receive instruction.

Bearing in mind the culture and the inherent belief in prophecy, being foretold that one’s brothers would bow down before you, would certainly have given the Jews a sense of entitlement, but it was the expectation of ‘Shiloh’ that conferred on the Jews, this sense of having been specifically chosen by God as the chosen tribe for his work and through whom Shiloh would come. The phrase was translated in the King James Version as, ‘until Shiloh come’; followed by ‘unto him, shall the gathering of the people be’, thus establishing Shiloh as a personal name.  As this was understood as a personal name, Shiloh became an epithet of the Messiah and it was interpreted as a messianic prophecy. It has also been reiterated in the Dead Sea scrolls and Rabbinic literature.

The Latin Vulgate translates the word Shiloh as "he that is to be sent", which in hebrew is ‘shaluach’, messenger  from ‘Shalu'ach’ the passive form, and means "being sent", but remarkably, the sentence ’unto him shall the gathering of the people be’  which follows Shiloh, is in all Abrahamic religions associated with Michael the Archangel.  St. Michael or the Archangel Michael in Jewish, Muslim and Christian traditions is he who will unite all the nations into one understanding that there is only one God, instead of their partisan religions or versions of perception. Certainly the Archangel seems not to be bound by time and the deeds attributed to him begin before the time of Abraham and throughout biblical records. 
 The foretelling of his deeds are as an expectation to the end time, as a protector and unifier of God’s elect at the Day of Judgment or as Melkin relates ‘for a long time before’.  It seems to be a common expectation that at his coming in the flesh, all the nations are gathered to one understanding i.e. religion will become redundant.  Most theologians perceive Michael and his advent as being similar to that of Jesus’s return.  As we know, Jesus was certainly a witness who delivered a new understanding of the law, so it would follow that Michael should  be the other witness from Revelation, said to come at the end of time as confirmed by Daniel..... as even theologians have had difficulty separating their differences.

Problems frequently arise from the misunderstanding of this concept of time and the question arises frequently as to how can there be an end of Time?  When one understands that a seven thousand year period is decreed for the work of God to be completed and the prophets speak as understanding this scheme of time, we start to grasp such phrases as ‘Time, the times and half time’.  What the prophets are alluding to is the transliteration of physical history being spoken of in terms of the development of consciousness i.e. being a recognizable imprint on mankind’s spiritual nature.  Much of Genesis is metaphorical such as the seven days that God took to create the earth.  However the three periods of time mentioned above, exist within the seven thousand years of lineal time that the prophets understood would be the perameter of time within which God brings Man to Gnosis.  Only then can time have a start and have an end and the prophets predictions are seen to coincide within an understandable and apprehendable framework. Obviously this is not a start or finish to lineal time as we have become accustomed to measuring it, but is accounted as a set span of Seven thousand years from the point where God first infused the Divine spark within Adam.

Michael is credited with much influence for good over mankind, which is alluded to in the book of Enoch and many biblical appearances, and in other prophecies such as this account of St. Michael.  It is entitled the ‘Prophecy of the Curse’ and was found in the St. Michael church at Brent Tor, one mile from the St. Michael Ley line:

He stood there at the top of a mountain and far below was the river,

And  there sat seven men, three on this side of the river and the four on the other,

The river flowed peaceably from heaven and the willows cast their shadows in the water.

 In time there  appeared a branch of gold that floated gently on the water,

The branch was seen in the light above the water and the other part in the dark under the water.

These men were as priests, men dressed in ornate head covers and elegant apparel,

And contested as to the meaning of the golden branch, the three on the one side more vehemently, for they were brothers and did accuse each other.

None could agree on the appearance of the branch, nor the form of it.

They all saw the branch from their separate place in the light.

While the men disputed, a white cloud appeared above them and in it an Angel, and the men fell silent in shame.

A rainbow of seven colours, was over the Angel’s head and in his left hand, was a small scroll

The words on the scroll were like the wind.

The Angel put one foot on this bank of the river and the other on that side of the river,

 And he plucked the branch out over the river with his right hand.

Then all men saw the branch as one and the form of it, and wondered for it was holy.

They ceased to argue and understood the branch was from God,  and shame rested upon their faces.

None could avoid this curse that was upon all men, except that the Angel should return to them.

Figure 69 Showing the St. Michael Church at Brent Tor, one of the remotest churches in Britain and one mile from the St. Michael Ley line.

The three brothers seem to refer to the Jews, Muslims and Christians and the four others are apparent as the other religions from the four corners of the world; indicating that all men are from one God. The ‘Branch’ is a reference to a person:

Zechariah 3:8 ‘Listen, O high priest Joshua and your associates seated before you, who are men symbolic of things to come: I am going to bring my servant, the Branch.’

Zechariah 6:12  ‘And speak unto him, saying, thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, behold the man whose name is The Branch; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord’.

Psalm 80:15 And the vineyard which thy right hand hath planted, and The Branch that thou madest strong for thyself.

Jeremiah 23:5 ‘The days are coming, declares the LORD, "when I will raise up to David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right.’

Jeremiah 33:15 ‘In those days and at that time I will make a righteous Branch sprout from David's line; he will do what is just and right in the land.’

Isaiah 4:2  ‘In that day The Branch of the LORD will be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the land will be the pride and glory of the survivors in Israel.

Isaiah 11:1 ‘A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will bear fruit’.

Here in Zechariah 3:8, we see a good insight into Joshua and his associates being told they are ‘symbolic’ of things to come i.e. a foreshadowing of events to come. The basic concept to learn about the prophetical scriptures is that they are not only historical because they predicted events historically that did happen, but also similarly they speak of the repeating of history within consciousness, being relative and cognisable internally by an individual, yet linked similarly to past events, exemplified by the coming out of Egypt or the Fall of Jerusalem.
 In the past this extraordinary function of time repeating itself in consciousness, has not been consciously acknowledged, but perceived or described as ’foreshadowing.’ The prophets not only spoke the truth through God and predicted what was to come in their own time, but also speak as prognosticators across time.... to the progression of consciousness within this framework of what has transpired, so that, entirely dependent upon individual choice and obedience to the Law, mankind is elevated, spiritually becoming consciously self-aware of a Divine plan.

This divine plan by necessity must have structure otherwise the Prophets would not be able to foretell future events and if they could not predict then that which they purport to do would not be able to be termed prophecy. Since all Biblical prophecy is based upon this precept, we can only assume, should we be able to perceive some mechanism or form behind a divine plan, it would necessitate there being a God. For there to be structure which allows the very capacity to predict so that proof of that structure exists, it must be set in time so that its co-ordinates can be confirmed thus providing the proof of the prophetic.
It is through the thing called ‘time’ that we might be able to grasp the structure, mechanism or form, since it is the prophets that use this medium to predict across time that mankind might receive the truth that there is a God, as in Isaiah 37: 26 ’Have you not heard? Long ago I ordained it. In days of old I planned it; now I have brought it to pass, or in Isaiah 42:9,
 ‘See, the former things have taken place, and new things I declare; before they spring into being I announce them to you’.

This concept, of what transpired in history before the coming of Jesus, (we shall call ‘historical time’), seems to have some quality that is able to reflect itself into consciousness and theologians have referred to this quasi repetition as foreshadowing. ’Historical time’ is the first part of the three cycles of ‘Biblical Time’ and ‘Biblical Time’ is a concept of a block of time consisting of a total of 7,000 years within relative time (or lineal) and 'relative time' exists within 'Absolute time'.

 The second part of ‘Biblical Time’ is accounted as the  2000 years just passed since the birth of Jesus. The third part of ‘Biblical Time’ is the thousand years still yet to come, which is known as ‘Half time’. This sounds rather too straightforward, but without understanding this concept... the prophets, and what they foretell, becomes redundant to man in the modern era......  especially when their words are perceived of speaking only in ‘historical time’ and that their predictions are only applicable to the time prior to the birth of Jesus.

They do not only speak of a past era because they refer to a set of historical and geographical events, but their real effect and veracity can be witnessed in consciousness. This veracity as it can be ascertained, cognised or perceived in consciousness is proof of the prophets speaking the truth in a higher plane of understanding than that which is purely historical.

 It is essential to the understanding of 'Biblical Time', to know that its structure is built upon past events and as Solomon says in Ecclesiastes 1:9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
Solomon, probably the wisest man to have lived was cognisant of this pattern or structure and knew that man’s conscious elevation was linked to a repetition of past events.

‘Biblical Time’ is made up of three time periods that exist within a seven thousand year period that is part of on-going lineal or relative time and both are based in objective ‘Absolute time’. 'Biblical time', differing from 'Relative time' however, is entirely subjective and can only be apprehended by the perceiver .i.e only the individual can be cognisant of the fulfillment within himself of certain stages of that which transpired in historical time such as the coming out of Egypt or the Destruction of Jerusalem.
 Even if this view were widely accepted as part of human cognisance it will always remain subjective by its nature of being based in cognitive experience.

Joshua and his associates were those who had come from the captivity in Babylon, historically in Time and what the ‘branch’ is referring to here is St. Michael in his capacity of unifying all those released from captivity in spiritual Babylon just as Jesus had done in Spiritual Egypt (although Moses had done in historical time). Thus, in the following quote from Zechariah 6:12, 'Here is the man whose name is the Branch, and he will branch out from his place and build the temple of the LORD,......

St. Michael one of the ‘two witnesses’ from Revelation is said to be the builder of the spiritual temple and here is the essence and purport of the Grail in steps, degrees or grades toward the temple as highlighted earlier, as confirmed in Zechariah 5:11  ‘To the country of Babylonia to build a house for it. When it is ready, the basket will be set there in its place.’  
 Babylon becomes Iconised to be ‘re-cognised’ as the Spiritual place of purification and this process is likened to the time of the Captivity, yet the time spans being numerically similar are foreshortened as the progression of the 7,000 years passes as related in Daniel 9:24, ‘Seventy 'sevens'(weeks) are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy’.

The prophets speak of one accord, in a language framed on metaphor in ‘Biblical Time’ and the difficulty in understanding them is that our concept of time is only linear, yet theologians have always understood or perceived the concept of foreshadowing. How is it possible to have a form of repeat if it did not happen before and if religious teachers accounted it as foreshadowing, in what form and with what relevance is it cognised?
 The only way that this can be understood is that an occurrence or set of events that transpired is perceived on a different plane and it is consciousness that has perceived this connection, yet it is within 'time' in which that function is carried out.

Man has a limited a concept of time and understands it on a pesonal level, purely as a form of measurement, yet it defines other quantities by which man can calculate. For example, such things as velocity.
 So if we were to try to identify time there would be three genres: Absolute time, (that which can only be understood mathematically), Relative or Linear time (that within which we are in constant flux) and Biblical time which gives location to consciousness, but is set within the parameters of a seven thousand year period of 'Linear time', the starting point of which is allegorised in the book of Genesis as having started with Adam. Biblical time has a beginning and ending, it is the period through which God's work is to be accomplished and this work is the 'Elevation of Consciousness'.

Sir Isaac Newton devoted much thought to the Prophets and the question of their predictions in time, especially regarding the books of Revelation and Daniel. He was probably one of the greatest minds that ever lived and he recognised the correlation of all the prophets speaking a language that was based in time that needed to be interpreted or decoded. This exercise can be likened to the understanding of a parable which speaks a precise truth in layers of meaning. Newton’s main concern was to marry, or at least untangle, all the prognosticated time periods in these prophecies, relative to others but he got bogged down in definition not realising the shifting of the relationship of the three parts of ‘time, the times and half time’ as it relates to the totality of Biblical time.

 He tried to rationalise all evidence through lineal time or as he called it ‘relative time’ but he understood that days, weeks, months and years spoken of in the prophets were somehow interchangeable. In both Daniel and Revelation much attention is paid to the placement of events in time, the 1260 days being interchangeable with the 42 months and the forty two months being the same as three and a half years and so on, but what Newton was unwilling to concede and became mired in, is that time itself for the Biblical prophets had a start and finish. Not only this, but within the seven thousand year period it had other planes in which measurement started and ended as the prophets spoke across time concerning the on-going process in mankind as a whole and of spiritual elevation within the individual.
 It is as if a random seven thousand year period in relative time was sectioned off,  in which consciousness might find location or might become self-aware within its parameters, as if being born and the womb of this work was a set period of time.  When they see among them their children, the work of my hands, they will keep my name holy; they will acknowledge the holiness of the Holy One of Jacob, and will stand in awe of the God of Israel.

Time is a part of a system of measure used to sequence events, to compare the durations of events and the periods between them. It is also used as a relative measure to quantify rates of change such as the motions of objects which generally give mankind his sense of time, being derived from planetary movement.
 The temporal position of events with respect to the transitory present is forever in flux, future events forever becoming present, then becoming events measured in time that have lapsed into the past. These events are then classed on a grander scale, for example in geological time spans... and this gives us our position relatively in lineal time.  This concept of proportion renders us a sense of position locating us in the present relative to for example, the geological periods or the ‘big bang’.

 Before we get bogged down in definition, it is expedient to express that man’s spiritual nature is entirely due to the intervention of God’s implant or work in mankind. The precise nature of spirit we cannot divine, but its mix with man’s soul (just like any animal has), has led to the elevation of consciousness  toward Gnosis through time. The expression of which has led to terms such as Zeitgeist as understanding the progressional shifts in the overall consciousness of mankind. However progression of consciousness applies equally to the individual also, but consciousness can only be as advanced to a point or limited by, how far mankind has travelled in his RE- COGNITION of that which has transpired in time historically according to the Divine plan. To put it another way which will be elucidated upon later, the coming of Jesus and his sacrifice for mankind is related to the 'coming out of Egypt' as a foreshadowing, yet the return from Babylon, by the same notion is connected by a foreshadowing to Michael the Archangel.

Biblical Time however, is conceptualised relative to consciousness over a 7000 year period that exists within lineal time. This seems to be so that consciousness and its elevation (the work of God), becomes cognisant of its past relative to its history, its provenance being identifiable on another plane.
We can see evidence of this in the mystery of ‘Adam’ becoming ‘iysh’ in the prophets and also of man bearing a son. Adam in the Hebrew is defined as ruddy, a human being, an individual or of the species, mankind, but more specifically, a common sort or low, a mean man of low degree basically giving the sense of rudimentary man. This sense of the word is defined by the prophet’s use; as being equatable with the first man, the progenitor of all men. He differs from the higher animals in that his substance, (which is consciousness) was not something that evolved but was made by God to be conscious seven thousand years ago i.e. through God’s action alone man became a conscious being.This is not to compare with the consciousness of animals but to be separated from them by the infusion of the Divine spark, spirit or whatever attribute it is that sets mankind apart in his cognitive processes such as abstract thought.  This is really highlighted in the sudden exponential rate of change compared with the slow progression of man over a huge timespan from his beginnings as an ape through to Homo Sapiens. Of course we see sedentary progression in the species of man but nothing like the near vertical graphical change from horizontal that has occured in the last 6,000 years.

‘Iysh’,  however is another term for ‘man’ translated from Hebrew in the prophets and is defined with a more glowing set of accolades as individual, champion, a man being good, great or mighty, a man of, ‘high degree’  a husband, man(-kind),  a person, or steward, what (man) soever, whoso(-ever) is worthy. One can see the differentiation in Strong’s Hebrew definition of the two types of man easily classified and that ‘iysh’ is altogether a higher type of man. It is this very definition that separates spiritual man ‘iysh’ from conscious man ‘Adam’. The reason we have to make this distinction is to show that Adam is epitomised in the first four thousand years of historical time. 
 Spiritual man came with the advent of what was termed the Holy spirit at the outpouring, after Jesus’s death. Not wishing to fall into the same trap of definition that Newton faced, suffice it to say that the duality of man seems to be behind that part of man’s conscious formed through mankind’s growth experiences through the empires which constitutes what we know to be the soul as opposed to the spiritual side of man which has been formed over the last two thousand years. Like most theological or philosophical discourses, they are self-confuting because how can the resonance of words based in the mundane pertain to attributes more dimensional but we should falteringly proceed to an outline on the canvas.

 It is the fusion of this duality that constitutes ’life’, the fusing of soul and spirit that is the climax of the six thousand years of biblical time to date. It is the fusion of these two, no longer working in opposition but in submission, that will bring self-awareness, gnosis, or full consciousness over the next thousand years.  Adam and ‘iysh’ being the product of these two periods of time but Adam remaining just a conscious man if the spirit is allowed to die within, through lack of faith, non-belief or disobedience to conscience.

The evidence of duality in man can be recognised because of the contention of obedience to a conscience. So if we accept the duality of soul and spirit we can follow through the progress from a mundane ‘God given spark’ of self-awareness which was synonymous with the conscious state of Adam and then through his offspring’s historical sagas, over a four thousand year period until the advent of Jesus. It was the advent of Jesus that brought the last shift in consciousness through his sacrifice. This as we have mentioned is equatable to the 'coming out of Egypt' in the spiritual sense.
 This will lead theologians into understanding that Jesus’s effect is historical, its only benefit being a rationalisation of belief and faith, yet it is his effect on the internal duality where one finds the benefit to mankind. The sceptic may ask, how is it that, all men fall under this umbrella of spiritual formation. The answer is, that they do not. Even though three quarters of the world fall under the Abrahamic faith, few men abide by God’s Law, yet an Edomite is under the Abrahamic construct of the divergence of spiritual paths.

 The one point to make here which differentiates 'Historical time' or the first 4000 years against the 2000 years which have just passed is that in 'Historical time' men were judged on the sins of their Fathers whereas for the last 2000 they have been judged on their own merit.  To understand this, it leads to another area of understanding that encompasses what happens to the soul and spirit that have fused after death and how it is that the substance of persona is 'Gathered unto his people' as it is often referred to:

Deuteronomy 32:50

... And die in the mount whither thou goest up, and be gathered unto thy people; as Aaron thy brother died in mount Hor, and was gathered unto his people: Genesis 49:29 ... And he charged them, and said unto them, I am to be gathered unto my people: bury me with my fathers in the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite.   Numbers 27:13. ... And when thou hast seen it, thou also shalt be gathered unto thy people, as Aaron thy brother was gathered.       Genesis 25:17 ... And these are the years of the life of Ishmael, an hundred and thirty and seven years: and he gave up the ghost and died; and was gathered unto his people. Genesis 35:29 ... And Isaac gave up the ghost, and died, and was gathered unto his people, being old and full of days: and his sons Esau and Jacob buried him.   Judges 2:10 ... And also all that generation were gathered unto their fathers: and there arose another generation after them, which knew not the LORD,

Deuteronomy 32:50

... And die in the mount whither thou goest up, and be gathered unto thy people; as Aaron thy brother died in mount Hor, and was gathered unto his people:   Genesis 49:29 ... And he charged them, and said unto them, I am to be gathered unto my people: bury me with my fathers in the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite   Numbers 27:13. ... And when thou hast seen it, thou also shalt be gathered unto thy people, as Aaron thy brother was gathered.   Genesis 25:17 ... And these are the years of the life of Ishmael, an hundred and thirty and seven years: and he gave up the ghost and died; and was gathered unto his people     Genesis 35:29 ... And Isaac gave up the ghost, and died, and was gathered unto his people, being old and full of days: and his sons Esau and Jacob buried him.     Judges 2:10 ... And also all that generation were gathered unto their fathers: and there arose another generation after them, which knew not the LORD,

  This is another digression so we should remain with 'Time' for the moment. 

Biblical time as we have seen has a beginning and an end based upon 4000 years historically from Adam to Jesus, 2000 years from Jesus to the relative present followed by a remaining 1000 years. To put it simplistically, it seems that mankind is to become cognisant by understanding a story of a people and place by experiencing first-hand in consciousness, the events that transpired between God and his people in that story.

To understand the dynamics of this occurrence is probably not possible, but it becomes clear on investigation of the prophets, that over the last 2000 years, a spiritual repetition or spiritual reflection of that previous 4000 year historical period, is now being evidenced and experienced in the individual. The whole process of spiritual development is in continuum, i.e. incorporated within and a continuation of linear time; 6000 years of 'Biblical Time' having passed, bringing us to 2000AD.  This then being followed by the 1000 year period which incorporates (reflecting history)  the spiritual progress of mankind over the preceding 6000 historical years and to the advent of St. Michael.

So in 'linear time', we see the accomplishment of 7000 years, which is the total of 'Biblical Time', but gnosis or full consciousness, (the object of God’s work),only being achieved at our 3000 AD,(in the present calendrical set up). Each individual only able to elevate themselves to Gnosis only as far as linear time has passed since 'Biblical time' was instigated. That is to say that there can be no spiritual advancement toward Gnosis further than the Biblical Time that has passed...... as time is the medium through which the proof of the prophets words will be established.

This same precept holds true for mankind’s progress through the last thousand years of the seven thousand years of total Biblical Time, which are still ahead and in the future. This gives us the ‘Time’ (historical 4000 years) ‘The Times’ (a spiritual reworking of historical time over the last 2000 years  but inclusive of the spiritual growth in the 2000 years) and half of the Times (the one thousand years to come), which makes the foreshortened period of one week (if each thousand years is accounted as a day) as the reader will be aware that in 2 Peter 3:8 With the Lord one day resembles a thousand years and a thousand years resemble one day.

This may seem at the same time, Ingenuous and Ingenious that a story devised by God for mankind’s cognition is ‘his story’ of the Jews and Jewish ‘history’.

It was with Newton’s faith, together with a firm belief that the prophets spoke across time,  that his investigation led to a theoretical foundation that facilitated Newtonian mechanics and in his ‘Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica’, comes up with the concepts of Absolute time and space.  According to Newton,  ‘Absolute time and space respectively are independent aspects of objective reality’. He believed in an absolute time that was similar to a universal, omnipotent God-like time, one that was the same for everyone, everywhere, Absolute, true and mathematical time, of itself, and from its own nature flowing equably without regard to anything external, which could be called duration.

Relative, apparent and common time, is some sensible and external (whether accurate or unequable) measure of duration by the means of motion, which is commonly used instead of true time’.

According to Newton, ‘Absolute time exists independently of any perceiver and progresses at a consistent pace throughout the universe’. Unlike Relative time, Newton believed Absolute time was imperceptible and could only be understood mathematically. According to Newton, humans are only capable of perceiving Relative time, which is a measurement of perceivable objects in motion like heavenly bodies and it is from them that we infer the passage of time.  What Newton was trying to divine was too complex to consolidate, not being aware that the perceiver actually effects as well as being affected by an object in motion and therefore dependent on the perceiver, the outcome always being different.  This in part goes someway to answering the conundrum of choice or freewill in a scheme of Biblical Time that appears fated.

We may not be able to have any concept of Absolute time, but conceptually we can understand the simplistic Genesis story that God’s work was completed in seven days and that the prophets relate time within the bounds of this elapse of time. This is essentially his story of man as related in the Bible starting with Adam and ending with a fully conscious spiritual being formed and initiated through a fusion of soul and spirit accomplished in the flesh.  It is the prophets’ measurements of those periods that seem interchangeable and interrelated, as man has progressed through Time, the Times and now as we enter half of the Times, that we become cognizant of the fact that we are still affected by all that has taken place previously and by gradual (gradatim) degrees of progression we aspire to gnosis. This aspiration to Gnosis is  synonymous with the building of the Temple  attained by grades indicated by Melkin in his reference to Shirei ha Ma'a lot’ that the Romancers understood as a location .

Essentially, mankind existing in time could never have a sense of time and without that, a sense of self, which by necessity includes location.  A location is necessary for full consciousness to inhabit, the goal of the divine plan as in Isaiah 42:9  You will see, the former things have taken place, and new things I declare; before they spring into being I announce them to you.  Or translated differently ‘the former things you will behold when they come to pass as new things that I have declared to you and before they spring forth, I will have told you of them.

So in effect Biblical history, set in a landscape and concerning the development of a people acts as pre cognition for their spiritual offspring, which has spread throughout the sons of Israel (those who believe in God), to become their potential through an understanding of a complex Divine plan beyond any man’s comprehension, but related as a comprehendible story set within limits of time.

What theologians have not grasped is that the time periods of a day, a week, a month, a year, described in the Bible vary according to what section in Biblical Time they refer to, as in Revelation 20:6 the verse that states ‘Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years,’  This is a direct metaphorical reference to those who are resurrected by Jesus out of Egypt, but who become dead to go into captivity in Babylon...... but then, by their belief in Jesus are then set free from Babylon after a seven year period of purification by the coming of St. Michael...... who don’t forget, was the only one to help Jesus fight the Kings of Persia in Daniel 10:13, ‘But the prince of the Persian kingdom (Babylon) resisted me twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, with those that remained there with the King of Persia’. Two thousand years have passed since Jesus came and now the 21^st century has arrived. This is also confirmed in Daniel 12:1 "At that time Michael, the great prince who stands over your people, will arise. There will be a time of trouble such as has not occurred before from the beginning of the nations until that time. But at that time he will rescue your people; everyone who attains to what is written in the book”.

If we now understand that the landscape of empires and nations is somehow internalized into the individual soul, we can then understand that the ‘book’ (mentioned above) refers to the Bible and it relates to Mankind’s attainment (spiritual advancement) through ‘time’, which is mentioned four times in this short passage.

We see that St. Michael’s mission or help is directly shown to be in the nature of a spiritual struggle against Man’s own inner nature as in Revelation 12:7 And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. The great dragon was hurled down; that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.  One begins to appreciate the role that the Archangel has, to help the whole world and before digressing any further, we should enquire as to the ‘time of distress’ mentioned throughout prophetical literature.

This is not understood theologically, as it is a reference to the destruction of spiritual Jerusalem primarily and will only be comprehended (or re- cognised) by those it transpires upon in its time. It is also a reference to Jehosaphat (judgement day) before the seven year spiritual Sabbath in one understanding, while also being understood as part of the last 1000 years of the seven days of Biblical Time (i.e. from the present until the end of biblical Time). However, more importantly it refers to the seven years of purification in which an individual must endure a spiritual fight (i.e. war in heaven) before there is rest, peace or gnosis, which is the inferred goal throughout the Prophets. It is synonymous with the 70 years captivity endured by the Jews historically and Jesus understood this recurrence of History as in Mark 13:9 when he says, ‘because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, from when God created the world, until now, and never to be equaled again. If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them’.

So we can see a spiritual recurrence of historical time and Jesus knew that the 70 years had been reduced to seven years (individually experienced) which, is one complete year of Sabbaths (one Sabbath per week per year) the requirement of purification, just as it was in Babylon for the Jews to cleanse themselves before their return to Jerusalem.  This sense is confirmed in Daniel 9:27 And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering.  But here, the seven years is referred to as seven days, exactly the same period which was spoken of as comprising Biblical Time. What was historically 70 years in 'Historical Time' became seven years in the Times; thus referred to as one week (seven days in half time) half of that week being a compulsory three and a half years of sacrifice and offering, the other of freewill until the seven years of Sabbaths is complete. It should be noted that the fall of Jerusalem and the return from the captivity transpired in 500BC mid-week in biblical time.

The three and a half days of half a week is the time the two witnesses are refused burial in Revelation11:9 ‘For three and a half days men from every people, tribe, language and nation will gaze on their bodies and refuse them burial. But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and terror struck those who saw them’.

 The burial of the two witnesses has nothing to do with physical burial but is a metaphor for the world’s non acceptance of Jesus’s and the Archangel’s testimony. Although Jesus did not come forth for a further 500 years and the advent of St. Michael has not transpired to date, the time span starts and is synonymous with, when the Jews returned from Babylon after having learnt that what the prophets had predicted had transpired, in spite of all the warning. Even after they had witnessed this truth, and some had been purified in captivity, they still fell into non-belief up to the advent of Jesus with many being born in Babylon remaining there.

 These are those for whom Michael will come to return from spiritual Babylon to Jerusalem in the spiritual sense, that is, to re-establish belief in the face of the fall of Spiritual Jerusalem.  So it is, that the world refusing the witnesses message starts from the same time as the time of the returning of the Jews and is timed from this event for three thousand five hundred years until the end of Biblical Time in 3000AD.

The consequence of Jesus’s message and that of Moses is that it is imprinted upon consciousness and its effect is that of a change in perception through the generations of mankind. Thus Moses initially gave the law that was metaphorically imprinted on Men’s hearts. Yet Jesus’s message had an effect of eradicating the slavish obedience of the levitical Law, to the freedom of obedience in the spirit to the new and condensed tenets mentioned earlier.  Now metaphorical burial of these witnesses can only be understood in terms of an individual constituting his own land. i.e a person becomes a location within which history is cognised upon a locational backdrop. This is a strange concept but essentially this is the essence of New Jerusalem which gives location in time and in consciousness and thus is the explanation of acceptance or refusal of the two witness’s testimony into that land. Those who accept the body into their land accept the message, those who deny it, refuse burial. This as we covered earlier is the essence of the Body of Christ and that of Moses and it is this ‘body of Moses’ that the Archangel contests with the Devil.

Periods in Biblical Time alter depending on whether referring to the separated periods of Time, The Times or Half of the Times. For instance the number from both prophetical books, Daniel and Revelation, of the one thousand two hundred a sixty days can be the forty two months or understood as half of the one week. This also can be understood as three and a half years, of the Sabbatical seven year period of purification that as we have covered is synonymous with the seventy year captivity.

 The confusion that Newton ran into is that it can also be equated with three thousand five hundred years, half of ‘Biblical Time’ and as we have seen this is also alluded to as half of the one week or seven day period of the 7,000 Biblical time period. This all sounds complicated but the prophets speak in a dimension that is interchangeable or relate periods that are subjugated parts of a whole and so can be viewed from different perspectives.

Biblical Time will not be understood without comprehension of the Prophets but when it is understood, it eradicates all futile discourse that attempts to marry the Genesis accounts of time with Darwinism and evolution.

The Genesis account, starts with the story of Adam as the first individual to have knowledge of self. For the most part understood to stem from original sin i.e. through a divine spark, the road to obedience to do right was born. From that point we can witness the meteoric rise of Gnosis, through experienced history as part of a precognitive process. Bodies of that experience have been communicated in writing and art for many years and nowadays are committed to memory storage which provides instantaneous knowledge of all Mankind’s endeavours via the internet.

 The prophets make sense only when one understands that.... what  transpired in historical Jewish history becomes reflected in spiritual growth as having been engraved upon Jews’ hearts. The true essence of circumcision is circumcision of the heart. Islam means Submission or Gnosis and the true Muslim that is a Jew at heart, has derived the same understanding from the same biblical prophets from which Mohammed reiterated in his writings the same values. Since the Law came from Moses and then through Judah and the Jews, through whom and of who, the prophets spoke..... we can see the most important God given asset that a man can possess (knowledge of the Law), was indeed spread far and wide by the Jewish race.

 Jesus who confirmed that, obedience to the law was a prerequisite of inheritance,  so making a true Jew no more favoured or better equipped than a true Muslim or any other man. The inheritors are those who adhere to Jesus’s encapsulation of the Law and the Prophets and whether a Muslim finds this submission through obedience to Mohammed’s words makes no difference as the principles are exactly the same. So as we understand that circumcision of the foreskin was a foreshadowing of circumcision of the heart which in turn was the foreshadowing of Gnosis, we can then understand why on the eighth day, Man is circumcised. Only after the seven thousand 'week' period of Biblical Time has passed, will Man reach Gnosis on the Eighth day.

So it is as if Man’s consciousness was being constructed and likened to a large edifice as in Daniel 2:31,

a large statue, an enormous, dazzling statue, awesome in appearance. 32 The head of the statue was made of pure gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, 33 its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of baked clay. 34 While you were watching, a rock was cut out, but not by human hands. It struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay and smashed them. 35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were broken to pieces at the same time and became like chaff on a threshing floor in the summer. The wind swept them away without leaving a trace. But the rock that struck the statue became a huge mountain and filled the whole earth.

We can see that the formation of man, through the empires alluded to here, is to undergo radical change by Divine intervention, an involuntary shift in consciousness and this will be the huge mountain. There is no other literature like the prophets and it is extraordinary how they all speak with one understanding that relate different perceptions from varying perspectives which provide a dimensional portrayal of a Divine Plan.

We can see from the prophets, the downfall of Jerusalem is of major importance to them and is the most part of the substance of the prophets living prior to the captivity. However their words apply also to the relative downfall of Jerusalem in consciousness. Their prophecy and the outcome of the Jews’ rebellion is in fact the foreshadowing of that which transpires in the spiritual fight on an individual basis; metaphorically using Jerusalem as a locus of the spirit in a landscape which becomes individualised as seen in one of the Psalms (122) of Ascents or Shirei ha Ma'a lot, “Let us go to the house of the Lord.” Our feet are standing in your gates, O Jerusalem. Jerusalem is built like a city that is closely compacted together, or again in 127, Unless the Lord builds the house, its builders labor in vain.

 It is purely for this reason that the prophets are so readily accepted and unanimously thought upon as being genuinely and authoritatively the written words of God’s voice, the provenance of the Abrahamic religions. Strangely, this concept is better understood by the Islamic faith than by the Christians or the Jews. For instance, to give a random example, both Celts and Arabs know that Jerusalem is where God had his Temple, (which divined the relevance of Jerusalem only in its Historical sense), yet they do not see, by the process of foreshadowing, its purport in the scriptures. Jerusalem is where the ‘I’ or ‘ME’  dwells and is the other plane of understanding which is necessary for transliterating and grasping the message of the prophets. Unfortunately neither Arab nor Celt, have biblical links to the holy city (it belonged to the Canaanites) and succumb to their more base understanding of Jerusalem being a city in a geographical location.

The Crusades and today’s Arab enmity stem from fighting for control of Jerusalem, yet the task and objective were and are futile, because God no longer abides there, except in the Jerusalem of consciousness , which is the Jerusalem of another plane and not linked to geographical location except as an Icon in biblical history.

It is through the St. Michael churches that we have been able to pursue much of this investigation, which seems to have centered not in the Holy Land, but in Britain.  The relevance of Zerah establishing a line of spiritual heritage in Britain has led to Britain being a cosmopolitan nation which still has a high degree of obedience to the Law (albeit secular rather than religious, yet one being derived from the other).  The Law seems to have been upheld amongst the normally corruptive nature of an intermingled culture.  The last Empire, that of the British is responsible for propagating the Law of Judah throughout the world and bringing its understanding to many Nations through the English Language.  It is through Zerah then that Jacob’s prophecy is confirmed as part of the Judah saga.

When one considers the effort to which Joseph went, to convey Jesus's relics to Britain and the efforts by those subsequently to keep Jesus’s and Joseph’s Island burial site a secret, the connection can only be the Island owned by the King of Sarras or Biblically known as Zerah or Zara.  Zerah or Zerach, whose name means ‘dawning’ is, as the word root implies connected to the Grail and the dawning of consciousness.  Michael, whose name means ‘who is like God’ has strong associations with the Messiah as one who comes to help his people at a certain stage in the repeat of Historical Time.  His Advent has no bearing on the second coming (the real Messianic fulfillment),  which can be recognized in the individual,  or understood generally as the overall raising of consciousness in Mankind and the enlightenment of Man, at the end of the next 1000 year period.  The great redemption of the Messianic age is spoken of in the prophets as a dawning age of realization and understanding, invoking Zerah as  Isaiah says 60:1-3, ‘Arise, shine; for your light has come, and the glory of the LORD has dawned (zarach) upon you. For behold, darkness will cover the earth and deep darkness the peoples (religion), but the LORD will rise upon you and His glory will appear upon you. Nations will come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your dawning (zarach)’.  Now it becomes apparent that the connection between Michael and Zerah of which the designers of the St. Michael churches and Ley line pattern must have been aware by naming them all after the Archangel, also must have understood that what the design secreted would be rediscovered in its appointed time.

 Melkin speaks in his prophecy of Jehosaphat and as we have just seen that the period to be heralded by St. Michael is the 1000 years to come, so is it by coincidence that Michael is the son of Jehosaphat king of Israel in 2 Chronicles 21:2?

It is a doubtful proposition that Tamar due to Judah's deference or Canaanite snubs boarded a trading vessel for distant shores. The sons of Zerah: Zimri, Ethan, Heman, Calcol and Darda, all seem to have left their mark in history, the first three easily traceable, the last Darda, becoming established possibly toward the Dardanelles.  We also know that Calcol journeyed West into Spain and no more is related about him from biblical sources.

He is however mentioned in 1 Ki 4:31 as one of the wise men with whom Solomon was compared but in this passage, Calcol is named as son of Mahol, while in 1-Chronicles 2:6,  he is called the son of Zerah of the tribe of Judah, and a brother of Heman and Ethan. Camden stated that Calcol of Judah sailed from Egypt to Spain where he established the city of Zaragossa which was named after Zerah his father. 

The word Iberia comes from the meaning ‘land of the Hebrews’ and the river Ebro in Spain is derived from the word Hebrew. Furthermore,  the city of Cadiz is named from Gaderia from the offspring of Gad, more Hebrews that worked the first in the mines in Spain.

Strangely enough in Sagunto on an ancient tombstone there is this engraved epitaph in Hebrew ‘this is the tomb of Adoniram, an officer of King Solomon, who came to collect tribute and died the (illegible date) day’. So was Cadiz the port which supplied the tin that was conveyed from Ictis to King Solomon’s kingdom long before the voyage of Pytheas.
Camden relates that Zarah sailed from there for Ireland where he founded ‘Ulladh’ modern day Ulster.  Although Geoffrey of Monmouth in his history of the Kings of Britain relates that Brutus came to Totnes in Devon from Troy, he also relates that he was accompanied by a leader called Corineus a sober minded man, wise in Council from whom Cornwall derives its name.

Geoffrey was not known for his accuracy, but he is said to have used  an ancient volume as a source for his tale of Brutus.  This volume may indeed have established a very ancient connection with the British people from Troy and Greece as the other brothers of  Calcol were said to have populated those environs.  It would seem that Calcol is a more likely candidate for the initial colonisation of the Law in Britain, his line of heritage having been traced as far west as Spain and possibly Ireland, the name Coel coincidentally appearing with royal connections as a forbear of Arthur possibly the last of the Zerah (Sarras) line of Jews in Devon and Cornwall.
 Since the Grail stories are unclear on the relationships between Joseph and some of the main characters who, however are related in some way, one now gets suspicious of the two Children in Leonardo’s painting accompanying Mary Magdalene as possibly being Jesus’s offspring.

 The one glaring omission of the Gospel writers is the silence in the New Testament about the marital status of Jesus. This lends itself to the theory that Jesus was in fact married because virtually every Jewish man in Jesus’ day did marry, especially those who were considered to be Rabbis. It is doubtful if Mary his mother, or the Magdalene would have been able to claim the body of Jesus after the Crucifixion and thus this right would have fallen to Joseph. The question as to whether Jesus had offspring or was even married has been speculated upon for years.

From the Nag Hammadi library comes the Gospel of Philip estimated to have been written about 120 AD and from this we hear “There were three who always walked with the Lord: Mary his mother and her sister and Magdalene, the one who was called his companion”.

Again in a different passage from Philip “And the companion of the Saviour is Mary Magdalene. But Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said to him, ‘Why do you love her more than all of us?’ The Saviour answered and said to them, ‘Why do I not love you like her?’ When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. Then the light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness” .

It seems that we will not know the answer to this and as the reader has digested, genetics or marital status has little to do with the effect that Jesus has had on Mankind as a whole. Marital status and genetics have little bearing on the part Jesus has played within a Divine plan. The disciples even complained at Mary’s extravagant use of Spikenard to wash Jesus just before Judas betrays him, but she knew of his pending death being told that her deed would be renown for all time. This surely seems more than just a casual relationship.

However, if Mary, Jesus’s mother was in fact Joseph’s niece, it might be that she had accompanied Joseph on a trip to Britain and become pregnant there.

Figure 69a Showing the Sacred Island, where Joseph of Arimathea chose to entomb his nephew and where his own relics rest.  It is Melkin and the Prophets who show that 2000 years afterward the discovery of their Tomb will start the final 1000 year era.

 If she had returned to Jerusalem for Jesus’s birth without an evident father, this surely would give rise to an Immaculate Conception scenario. If Jesus was then to accompany Joseph on a further trip at around age 6-7 to visit his Father, (possibly the king of Sarras) for his formative years, it would certainly explain John’s question about whether Jesus was the one he had been awaiting, and it would have provided a reason behind the Pharisees’ confusion as to Jesus’s provenance. This would have, of course presented problems in answering how James and Jesus’s other siblings appeared and would make Joseph of Arimathea extremely aged on his arrival in Britain. The marital  or relationship status has so many connotations, but as we have seen, by the absence of any marital status provided for Jesus, it was, perhaps the same for Mary, having taken a man called Joseph (Jesus’s supposed father who had died). He would of course, have been Jesus’s step-father and as the Gospel writers had to rationalise these events with their understanding of the prophets i.e. the Messiah being born of a virgin, thus it was so contrived. The prophets are in fact speaking of the Son of Man being born of the spirit (the virgin daughter of israel), but the Gospel writers were really in a spot to juggle information from ‘Q’, one of the main sources for the four Gospels and the conflicting factual evidence. 

If one remembers the proposition of Jesus learning the Law outside Jerusalem and Joseph’s efforts to bring his relics to The Island of Sarras, also known as the Island of the Blessed, then adding this to Jacob’s prophecy being fulfilled through Judah; it would appear to be the possible connection and fulfilment through Zerah.  However, as we are not able to substantiate Jesus’s direct genetical link with Sarras by any concrete fact, we can only posit that it is through Calcol or his offspring that the prophecy is fulfilled. Those who originally arrived in the South West of England could in effect be the fulfilment of Jacob’s prophecy regarding Judah, for transmitting to the British Isles the Mosaic Law rather than any direct genetical link through Sarras.
Britain was a name that was recorded by the Romans, but the word "Brit", means "covenant", from the Yiddish word for the circumcision ceremony, from bris milah,( Ashkenazi pronunciation of brit milah) "covenant of circumcision." And the "Ish" part of the word as we have seen in juxtaposition to ‘Adam’ means spiritual(higher) man or people. So the word "British" is derived from the words "Covenant People", “spiritual man”.  Some commentators have suggested the ending ’tain’ in "Britain" is derived from a Phoenician association with the ‘Land of Tin’. Ceasar bore witness to the complex religious understanding the Britons had at the time of the Invasion. The British Israelites (a late eighteenth century fad) that proposed connections with the ancient israelites after the captivity were probably not incorrect  in assuming the arrival of some of the Diaspora (and thus an understanding of prophetical literature). I still maintain that the connection was previously established by the arrival of Calchol, Judah's offspring. Britain is where Solomon sourced his tin from and hence the Britons reference to the Phonecian trading ship that Joseph of Arimathea arrived on being termed Solomon's ship in Grail literature. It was probably the arrival of this ship from ancient time that established Ictis as a co-operative of tinners and thus the island being termed an 'Emporium'.

 However, without further digression, anyone who obeys the Law of Moses now lives by it and as such, carries it in his body and this is the body of Moses, just as anyone who obeys Jesus’s doctrine has the body of Christ within them.  It is not by coincidence that the body of Moses is the substance of which St. Michael the Archangel disputes with the devil, ‘bringing no railing accusation against him’, at his misunderstanding. This is mentioned in Jude 1:9  ‘But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him, but said, The Lord rebuke you!’ 
It has commonly been assumed by commentators on the scriptures, that St. Michael and the Devil are disputing over the whereabouts of Moses’s tomb, as Moses’ bones were buried in Moab before the Israelites crossed into the Promised Land. Deut 34:4 Then the LORD said to him, "This is the land I promised on oath to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob when I said, 'I will give it to your descendants.' I have let you see it with your eyes, but you will not cross over into it."  Most theologians’ misinterpretation of the purport of the Archangel’s dispute is brought about by not having understood that the Promised Land is as a state of mind or recognised internally within an individual. Just as Jerusalem was the ‘I’ or ‘me’ and existed as a locus in consciousness; so too is the promised land akin to a mental landscape giving locus in which to reference the Prophets. In the Book of Joshua 5:13-15, Joshua encounters a "captain of the host of the Lord" in the early days of his campaigns in the Promised Land which as we shall see shortly is connected with St. Michael.

The real purport of the Archangel’s dispute is that the Law, (the body of Moses) would have no place in the Promised Land, because having been conditioned by the Law, one can see it (credo ut intelligam). Once having entered the Promised Land (on a conscious level), the Law effectively becomes redundant, by living the Law without internal struggle due to undergoing the seven years of purification. Now if one enters the Promised Land and one lives through the Law and not by it, the very process by which Satan operated (that is by accusation through the law), sin now becomes of no effect. This is the 'peace' that is refered to over and over by the prophets (a spiritual state of consciousness).

Again, it will not be lost on the reader that the religious men or priests (the seven men in St. Michael’s prophecy) are similarly analogous to the propagators of religion throughout the world.  These are known as the priestly cast of Levites and receive no inheritance in the Promised Land scripturally, but on the sub conscious level they also understand that this is their lot. This, in essence will be the downfall of Religion, because consciousness has reached a proficient level that those who propagated the dead fundamental creeds have become redundant. This in no way dismisses religion, but conversely, without it, the various religions would not be aware of their common identity and be ready for world change.

This view can similarly be taken in that, pre-cognitively, the purpose of the Law was to instill in man the knowledge of right and wrong (by adherence to Levitical deeds), but was simplified by Jesus, not for any inherent failings in the law itself, but for non-adherence and cultural corruption. Likewise, so it is for religion in this time and the need for a consolidator in St. Michael.  We see that religion has been corrupted just as the Law of Moses was, as in Mathew 23:13 Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.

So do those who profess to know the Law in all the religions of the world, (who dispute their perspectives of the divine)... all see an essential truth in a form that has become corrupted?  It is as if those seven men, each side of the river in St. Michael’s prophecy, see 'the Branch' differently due to their different perspectives from their position on the bank, just as the branch would appear (in the light) due to refraction.

It is interesting to note that it was Moses who brought the Israelites out of Egypt historically when ‘Moses said to God, "Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is his name?' Then what shall I tell them?" God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.’  We need look no further than the height of western philosophy’s ‘Cogito ergo sum’.
Philosophers doubt and question everything, which is why Rene Descartes made his name in philosophy supposedly by proving his own existence. He used this premise to demonstrate, indubitably, even that his own self existed, yet had he applied ‘I believe that I might understand’ (credo ut intelligam), instead of ‘cogito ergo sum,’ he might not have excluded the only evidence that would substantiate his premise, which is consciousness, the very objective of the divine plan.  Descartes said, "I noticed that while I was trying to think everything false, it had to be that I, who was thinking this, was something. And observing that this truth, I am thinking, therefore I exist (Je pense, donc je suis; cogito, ergo sum)  was so solid and secure that the most extravagant suppositions of the sceptics could not overthrow it, I judged that I need not scruple to accept it as the first principle of the philosophy I was seeking."  Descartes in saying that he existed, counteracted those philosophies of absolute scepticism, but those who thought thinking was the proof of existence needed a locus as proof and thus we have the prophets setting of the Promised land as in Isaiah 62:4 for the Lord will take delight in you, and your land will be married.   For Descartes, ‘thinking’ included any activity of consciousness, thinking, imagining, willing etc, but strangely the proof for which he was searching, without the acceptance of God (full consciousness) is the very answer he needed. The proof that he used is the same that God had given to the Israelites and which Descartes used for his own existence ‘I am who I am’. So one can see the essence of Descarte's struggle to an arbitrary sophist conclusion, is in fact the essence behind the Divine plan, for without locus (all of historical Biblical time) self-awareness would have no foundation.

However, it is confirmed by the Prophets and the Psalms, that Judah is synonymous with the law and the tribe by which God had chosen to propagate his Law into the nations is the Jewish people. It becomes plain that a Jew by biblical definition is anyone who has come out of Egypt (spiritually) and who initially obeys the law and that Law is now engraved as an active participant within an individual and is more commonly known as conscience as in Romans7:21 So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me.  It is this very nature that the divine plan sets out to overcome within the bounds of time.

 The three time periods set within Biblical time i.e. Time, The Times and Half of the Times..... we find that, within these times there are three progressions toward consciousness to be made for mankind and these constitute the Three Days that Jesus foretold that if one was to destroy the Temple it would be rebuilt and to which those scoffers referred as he hung upon the cross  as in Mark 15;29,Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, “So! You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days.” 
The two events in Jewish history most often referred to in the prophetical literature, are the coming out of Egypt and the fall of Jerusalem in conjunction with the Captivity and return after the seventy years. These are directly synonymous with the Spiritual progression of mankind. The first, the ‘coming out of Egypt’, is mentioned in so many ways and with certain admonishments and with great frequency, all reference to this event being a form of pre- cognition, so that Mankind might understand that through the history of the Jews a story is being unveiled of the spiritual progression of Mankind.

1 Samuel 10:18 This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: 'I brought Israel up out of Egypt, and I delivered you from the power of Egypt and all the kingdoms that oppressed you.

Exodus 13:3 And Moses said unto the people, Remember this day, in which you came out from Egypt, out of the house of bondage; for by strength of hand the LORD brought you out from this place: there shall no leavened bread be eaten.

Exodus 20:2 I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

Hosea 11:1 When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.

Micah 6:4 I brought you up out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. I sent Moses to lead you, also Aaron and Miriam.

Coming out of Egypt is synonymous with belief in God and is accounted as a spiritual first progression and the event is often referred to as being miraculous i.e. the event is inexplicable. The coming out of Egypt is analogous to the first sense of awareness that there is a spiritual nature in man and is often cognised and apprehended in youth as seen in Hosea 2:15 There she will sing as in the days of her youth, as in the day she came up out of Egypt.

This spiritual event takes place amongst all the sons of Israel whatever the religion and is constituted as the first appearance of conscience as part of a heightened consciousness. This spiritual event is the beginning of the duality in man and this belief is either strengthened or weakened by the choice of the individual in question, over time. The result of this choice defines any further spiritual growth and defines the lot of the individual in the complex array of circumstances, in the rich tapestry of life.

The second set of circumstances that took place in historical time and are thus accounted as the second spiritual progression is the Fall of Jerusalem, the captivity and the return. As we have covered already, this period and set of events brings us to the Spiritual equivalent and thus to the present day i.e. the end of ‘the Times’ and is the beginning of the New era. This whole array of historical events that become a form of pre-cognition for spiritual experience can only be fully apprehended through a depth of understanding of the prophetical literature. Unable to  formulate every phrase from the prophets and how it relates to another in context by cross reference to time, precludes that the endeavour is too lengthy to be elucidated within these pages.

 However, the prophets cannot be comprehended and often will make little sense, if this concept of the separation of three periods of time, existing within a 7,000 year framework of Biblical time, is not applied. When it is applied the four thousand years of ‘Historical time’  acts as a reference to what transpires in the ‘Times’ and may be cognised as part of the make-up of Spiritual progression toward Gnosis; the essence of the Grail.

Theologians up to the present day have interpreted the Prophets in a strictly historical sense, which has caused misunderstanding and strife between the three Abrahamic religions and those like Sir Isaac Newton,  trying to unlock the relationship of time, to the words of the prophets, have found difficulty as he explained, ‘To prepare the reader also for understanding the Prophetique language, I shall lay down a short description thereof, showing how it is borrowed from comparing a kingdom either to the universe or to a Beast: So that by the resemblance of their parts the signification of the figurative words & expressions in these Prophesies may be apprehended at one view and limited from the grownd thereof. By which means the Language of the Prophets will become certain and the liberty of wresting it to private imaginations be cut off’.  Although Newton does not manage to achieve the goal of elucidating the book of Daniel and Revelation, he understood that the two books were the key to unlocking the Scriptures and Time saying ‘ Daniel is most distinct in order of time, and easiest to be understood, and therefore in those things which relate to the last times, he must be made the key to the rest’.

The prophets spoke, so that those in the future, (when consciousness had advanced to a point where their body of work might be re- cognised with intellectual certainty), could recognise through pre-cognition. It was God that spoke through them and thereby they would understand that the prophets words come to us as it were on a different plane i.e. not historical but as an experience through consciousness.  The truth of what they said being revealed by their relevance, apprehended and to be cognised intellectually and perceived, so that full awareness would no longer need to contemplate such futile propositions as Descartes’.

 The term prophet would be redundant if the Biblical prophets did not speak of the future and if they only spoke of Jerusalem historically and geographically what relevance would they have today? Again Sir Isaac Newton counselling, ‘That the benefit which may accrue by understanding the sacred Prophesies and the danger by neglecting them is very great and that the obligation to study them is as great, as may appear by considering the like case of the Jews at the coming of Christ. For the rules whereby they were to know their Messiah were the prophesies of the old Testament’.

 So too, does this same adage apply today in that; without studying the prophets, the full potential of Gnosis within the Individual within his lifetime may not be achieved as accounted according to the advancement of the Gnosis of Mankind as a whole, in time.

The prophets speak of Jerusalem in Time historically yet speak allegorically of New Jerusalem (with no less profundity) as a replica or model existing in a different layer or plane, across Biblical Time. This can be apprehended individually on a spiritual level or understood in terms of the elevation of the consciousness of Mankind as a whole.

The usual set back to this form of perception is that man has not understood the essence of time and how the Prophets speak a consistent truth across time but this is only apprehended as consciousness is elevated. Mankind’s concept of time is surely that of a lineal measurement and thus such events as the Crusades, undertaken by religious fundamentalists who plainly perceive the prophets word only in the mundane and historical sense,  are one of the root causes of Global strife that continues through to the present era. This essential problem still exists in that the genetic Jews claim a stake, in a land that is not theirs by birth right, whereas the spiritual Jew, has his birth right as the Promised Land or spiritual peace.

 This potential powder keg of fundamentalism, religious and cultural allegiances, can only be defused when the concept of time is understoodas it relates to the Prophets, because it is their words that have created to desire to hold control of Jerusalem. It can only be understood and resolved when those who wish to help find a solution accept that the Jerusalem which they seek is not the prize of a geographical Jerusalem. Unless religion and fundamentalism is eradicated this may explode with serious consequence for Mankind. Until world leaders understand the fundamental concept that if God brought on the Diaspora to propagate the Law throughout the nations, by scattering the Jews amongst them; then it was not the right of the British to interfere leading to the Jews genetic progeny declaring a piece of ‘Terra firma’ was now called Israel which was up until that time the land of the Palestinians.

 This is a complex situation without resolution except if the promised land is perceived as having been misunderstood by the waves of Jews that returned in the four Aliyah’s. The Balfour Declaration by the British foreign secretary in a letter stated:

His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

This clearly has evolved and is not the case today nor has it been since.  In 1922, the League of Nations granted Britain a mandate over Palestine and ever since this has been the root cause of strife in the modern world. One positive effect of this contention is the fact that it may be realised;  it is the prophets words and the misunderstanding of them that are at the center of controversy. The upside of this is that it will maintain the prophets credibility and the world may grasp their relevance as Newton understood.  After the various pogroms and the holocaust it is time that all nations realise that the Jerusalem that is spoken of by the prophets is entirely different from that which the Jews covet in Israel. Even if this view cannot be understood or accepted by world leaders due to the lack of understanding that the mundane city of Jerusalem is no longer a holy place but it was a foreshadowing of New Jerusalem, it will eventually unite the Jews of all the Abrahamic faiths and breakdown the barriers that have been created by Religion.

If one were to accept the Prophets only pertained to a fundamental historical viewpoint, the genetic Philistines and Canaanites still have a claim prior to the genetic Jews. Just to make this clear and not cause any further prejudice against genetical or hereditary Jews, they are in no way disqualified from being inheritors of the spiritual Promised Land, the qualification of which is adherence to the Law, as is every other member of Mankind. Without wishing to cause any further oppression to the adherents of the Jewish religion, it must be understood that the Jews forebears relinquished their God given rights to geographical Israel and Jerusalem in the five hundred years between the ‘Return’ and the advent of Jesus through corruption and continuing rebellion to God’s law. That generation absolved themselves to Pilate saying 'His blood is upon us, and upon our children; the temple was burnt and the importance of Jerusalem as the place where God had decided to make his abode in the Temple had shifted with the change from ‘Time’ to ‘The Times’. From that time forward Jerusalem’s importance was to be of a spiritual nature rather than geographical. The Jerusalem of which the Prophets spoke, was to act as pre-cognition (for those in the modern era) of that which had transpired in historical time.

If the reader thinks this position is unjust or spurious against the Jews genetical offspring, one only has to view by what mechanism the Holocaust came into effect. The God of Israel has surely no respect for persons and a Jew is not defined by tradition but by obedience to the Law as witnessed in Revelation 2;9 I know the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.
  Even if the invocation by the Jews against Jesus was entirely polemical (which it could well have been), the status held by existing Jews as not ‘peculiarly’ chosen by God is evidenced by the precarious state of their present habitation..... and there can be little doubt that in its entirety, their position against Jesus was one of rebellion against the Law and thus a rejection of his message. If the Land of Israel and Jerusalem are always considered in mundane terms, obviously there can never be a solution for those who believe Zion is to be built in modern day Israel rather than it being a spiritual state of mankind.

The only solution to this crisis of understanding is that the Jews of modern day Israel must comprehend their mistaken claim through the realisation of a much greater claim to Jewishness. They should open their borders and live peaceably with their genetic adversaries the Philistines, both having a share in government of a common mundane land and as Einstein stated, ‘Today we must abandon competition and secure cooperation. This must be the central fact in all our considerations of international affairs; otherwise we face certain disaster.  Past thinking and methods did not prevent world wars. Future thinking must prevent wars’.

The discovery of the body of Jesus and the realisation of his part in the Divine plan by a new understanding and paradigm shift in consciousness across the Abrahamic faiths, will in the end be the only solution to the crisis of understanding. A solution can only be agreed upon when all parties; Arabs, Christians and Jews understand their common heritage in the Law was instigated by the God of Israel.  This same God that inspired Mohammed as witnessed in Surah 4, Ayat 163  ‘Lo! We inspire thee (Muhammad) as We inspired Noah and the prophets after him, as We inspired Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and Jesus and Job and Jonah and Aaron and Solomon, and as we imparted unto David the Psalms’

We can see that there is no misinterpretation that the three Abrahamic faiths are based upon a united heritage, but it is only the dogmas of religious conventions and the mis-interpreted perceptions of the prophets that perpetuate divisiveness among the believers of all the Abrahamic religions.

Now with the seven thousand Biblical years that has been uncovered, we can see that in the reflection of the historical time period, we find ourselves presently at the period pertaining in 'Historical Time' to the fall of Jerusalem and the advent of the captivity as it correlates to the attainment of spiritual gnosis. It is from these events in history that prophecy references itself in the stages of Man’s spiritual growth. In the same way it is mirrored in the individual and recounts that story as stages of spiritual growth and therefore this is why our Lord is crucified in Egypt in Revelation 11:8 And their dead bodies (The Witness’s) will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord is crucified. The real purport of this being that those who do not accept Jesus are ‘Individually’ responsible for Crucifying him in Spiritual Egypt; the very people who do not accept his testimony and that of St. Michael, the two witnesses in Revelation.... and therefore their two bodies lie dead within them.

So the teachers of religion who have no sense of this arc of Biblical time related in the scriptures and how it pertains to the progress toward enlightenment, perpetuate their creeds and practises as if it were a dead body and as Sir Isaac Newton again states,  ‘consequently,  it is also our duty to search with all diligence into these Prophesies. And If God was so angry with the Jews for not searching more diligently into the Prophesies which he had given them to know Christ by: why should we think he will excuse us for not searching into the Prophesies which he hath given us to know Antichrist by?  For certainly it must be as dangerous and as easy an error for Christians to adhere to Antichrist as it was for the Jews to reject Christ. And therefore it is as much our duty to endeavour to be able to know him that we may avoid him, as it was theirs to know Christ that they might follow him’.

Even though these time periods are separate, they, by necessity of progression in consciousness are contiguous and include all that has transpired beforehand.  The pattern for the next thousand years will be that which transpired in the first 4000 years incorporated with what has transpired Spiritually for the last two thousand. What we have termed ‘Historical Time’ synonymous with the prophets ‘Time’ or the first 4000 years, is a history of God's work up to the death of Jesus and the destruction of the second Temple, and relates to the temporal passage of 'gradual' enlightenment of God's people, which in effect is  a foreshadowing of the building of the spiritual temple which the Grail Romances allegorised as steps upward into the temple or as in 1 Corinthians 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?  And again in 2 Corinthians 6:16 for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Contestation by the religions for Jerusalem and the Temple mount is  a dead practise and outmoded, having no profit for those wishing to attain this false conception of Zion because it's  only relevance is as part of the Jewish history. Nowadays it should only be considered in context as an icon of spiritual growth. Until competition for possession of the Temple mount is understood as futile and the position of Jerusalem as a locus is no longer considered a pre-requisite of the establishment of Zion ..... there will be strife and this fundamentalism will continue.
 The real relevance of Jesusalem has shifted to being part of potential for consciousness. This misunderstanding is still peddled by the religions contrary to the real purport of the Temple.... as being exemplary of existing within the individual.

The confirmation of this perception  and the relationship of the Law existing within  the Temple and its connection to the promised land as a part of a pre-cognitive icon in a spiritual landscape, is summed up by Jeremiah 7:4 Do not trust in deceptive words and say, "This is the temple of the LORD, that is the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD is here!" If you really change your ways and your actions and deal with each other justly, if you do not oppress the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow and do not shed innocent blood in this place, and if you do not follow other gods to your own harm, then I will let you live in this place, in the land I gave your forefathers for ever and ever.

By a simple process of transliteration the land where the temple exists and the way one treats others is internalised. Otherwise if understood literally the prophecy would not be true.... as in the geographical sense, the Temple no longer exists and in Jeremiah’s day there was no question as to the site of the Temple.
 Many of the probems in Israel are caused by the great prognostications by the prophets regarding Jerusalem.  Of course if these profound prophecies are applied literally those that do not understand will live in a 'state of expectation' of the appearance of the third Temple.  Regarding the physical location of Jerusalem, these prophecies are not going to be fulfilled. Of course they will be in the New or Spiritual Jerusalem. There can be no solution while the misguided religions and their leaders misunderstand the purport of these prophecies and squabble over Land in which their expectations will never be fulfilled.  

In the past 2000 years, 'the Times’, relate to spiritual growth based upon historical events, so that today we have reached the time, spiritually coinciding with the destruction of the Temple by the Babylonians which is followed by the captivity and discovery of the book of the Law.  The coming out of Egypt then, spiritually relates to the acceptance and first understanding that there is a God. This is then followed by a long period of rebellion, against conscience (or the Law engraved within), until the destruction of the spiritual Jerusalem, for continued non-compliance.  This is  then to be followed by the captivity, (this being divided into two three and a half year periods), which in effect is the seven years of spiritual obedience, which essentially is a total of one year of Sabbaths; as reported by the prophets.  Yet Jeremiah, speaking in Time, correctly predicts before the event of the 70 year Babylonian captivity, but in the same sense foretelling of the repetition of these events as transpiring in Spiritual development to be apprehended by future generations..... therefore providing proof and evidence of a divine and preordained plan.
 This relation of the Sabbath not only being the 1000 year period i.e. the seventh day of a six thousand year period; but a seven year period of spiritual obedience after the fall of Jerusalem, again being evidenced in Mark 2:27 when Jesus states; The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Although this was used as a rebuttal for an accusation that Jesus’ deeds did not fit with social perceptions, the truth of the saying being more profound when applied to the seven year period of purification and the seventh day of the seven thousand year period, designed as a Divine plan.

The role played by St. Michael who seemed to have an active role throughout the Jewish and Christian scriptures and Islamic eschatology does not explain how ‘one of the chief princes’, an archangel becomes canonised. Legend makes Michael the teacher of Moses; so that the Israelites are indebted to their advocate for the supreme good of the Torah. This idea is alluded to in Midrash Deuteronomy Rabbah xi. 6 in the statement that Michael declined to bring Moses' soul to God on the grounds that he had been Moses' teacher.

In the Qur'an, Michael is one of the Archangels in Islam, mentioned with Jibreel (Gabriel) but Michael is mentioned once only, in Sura 2:98, ’Whoever is an enemy to God, and His angels and His messengers, and Jibreel and Mikhail! Then, lo! God (Himself) is an enemy to those disbelievers’.  In Sunni and Shia eschatology, the Mahdi (Arabic: مهدي‎ English: Guided One) is the prophesied redeemer of Islam who will stay on Earth for seven years, before the Day of Judgment (yawm al-qiyamah or the Day of Resurrection) and, alongside Jesus, will bring peace to the world.  It becomes apparent that there is a common expectation across the religions about Michael. If Michael is the Mahdi, taking into consideration the connection with Jehosaphat of the biblical divine plan, his association(as seen in the naming of all the churches) with the unveiling of Jesus’ tomb and coming of the seven year Sabbath equating with the seven years on earth of the Shia expectation; this together with the fact that Michael in Daniel is coming to help Jesus with God’s people..... would appear that the Archangel possesses some messiah like qualities for all the Abrahamic religions.

A fundamental tenet of Islam is belief in the day of resurrection, (Qiyamah) and as we have explored, this resurrection is to happen spiritually at a point in time.  Since we have found that this new spiritual reawakening is at the advent of St. Michael at the coming out of Spiritual Babylon and the uncovering of the tomb; the designers of the Michaeline church network who led us to Joseph’s tomb, must have been aware of his advent in Biblical time at an appointed time, i.e. at the unveiling of the tomb.  The Templars were thus responsible for the dedication of the St. Michael churches and also can be accredited to the proliferation of veneration from being ‘commander of the heavenly host’ to that of a saint. Oddly enough, the French ‘Order of St. Michael’  which was dedicated to the Archangel Michael, conveyed to every member a gold badge with the image of the saint standing on a rock in combat with the serpent, which was strangely consistent with the elevated often rocky positions of the churches. But the real relationship between the Archangel Michael and the tomb seems to have been understood by Melkin but where did he get this association from that was perpetuated by the Templars. Was it though an apparition of the Archangel as Helinand relates or was it from textual and scriptural information found in the tomb itself at the death of Arthur and is it then Melkin who is ultimately responsible for the Insular cult of St. Michael that is evident today?

St. Michael is an angel who appears across the arc of Biblical time at many stages in the scriptures and he is accounted as playing a role in various biblical stories without being named explicitly. His appearances occur with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob including many others,  but here exemplified in Joshua 5:13-15,  ‘Once when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing before him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went to him and said to him, ‘Are you one of us, or one of our adversaries?’ He replied, ‘Neither; but as commander of the army of the Lord I have now come.’ And Joshua fell on his face to the earth and worshiped, and he said to him, ‘What do you command your servant, my lord?’ The commander of the army of the Lord said to Joshua, ‘Remove the sandals from your feet, for the place where you stand is holy.’ And Joshua did so.

Michael is also prevalent in the Apocrypha and in non-canonical texts such as in Enoch 24:4-10 where Enoch is before the Tree of Life/Mercy, and Michael explains to him that he should not touch it, for it is for those who are 'elect' after the day of Judgement and in Enoch 20:5 where it relates that Michael presides over human virtue in order to command nations.  Most importantly, in Enoch 58, it reveals Enoch overcome with terror over a vision he has and Michael is quick to interpret for him saying ‘The terror is only for those who turn on Yahweh, that the Day of Judgement is for the elect, a day of covenant, while for sinners it is a day of inquisition’; this elucidating the point that Michael comes at a critical point in time; which not only confirms his role in the prophets, but also that his role is for the elect at the day of Judgment.  This Jehoshaphat is inextricably linked to the fall of the Spiritual Jerusalem and is confirmed to be associated with the world changing reawakening, at the advent of the discovery of Jesus’s body in Avalon spoken of by Melkin.

Yet in Enoch 68:20-22, Enoch is told that Michael holds a secret oath, so that the elect shall not perish by their knowledge of it like the sinners.  This knowledge is plainly that of the ‘Gradatim’ in Biblical Time, because with this knowledge one has a sense of Consciousness in time; the potential behind the divine plan.

Michael the Archangel who seems to be of similar nature to Jesus and exists across Biblical Time is being referenced not in historical Time but in The Times in this passage in Daniel, as it relates that ‘But the prince of the Persian kingdom resisted me twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, because I was detained there with the king of Persia’.  Translators not fully understanding the sense and the concept of biblical time, have rendered it as such making no sense whatever, when it should have been translated as; But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me with those that remained with the kings of Persia. i.e. Babylon the Great mentioned in Revelation in the 21^st century or 21 days after the advent of Jesus.

Michael's main task after the fall of spiritual Jerusalem and the Babylonian captivity is to help Jesus, in the spiritual fight against the Kings of Persia.  This was attested to in Revelation, not meant in Time, but at the end of the ‘Times’, and not therefore historically but spiritually.  And so literally, Michael will come to help God's people, the Jews, (not genetical but those who have knowledge of the law and in whom it has been instilled and then have fallen away from obedience to it); but who still remain in that spiritual place mirrored as Babylon.  And so it may be understood that when the preacher states that there is 'no new thing on the Earth', he is alluding to the fact that history (time) is being replicated in man's spiritual growth toward full consciousness.

When Solomon the wisest of all men says: ‘I devoted myself to study and to inquire by wisdom all that is done under heaven. He then laments: ‘What a heavy burden God has laid on men! I have seen all the things that transpire under the sun; all of them are unfathomable, like chasing after the wind’.

Solomon then tries to fathom what the point of God’s work is and tries to describe the workings of time as it pertains to man’s perception.

‘What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one can say, “Look! This is something new”? It was done already, from long ago; it existed before our time. There is no remembrance of the earlier things which occur later but it will be like a memorial that these things occurred’.

It is interesting to note that Michael’s arrival is in this century, as the 21 days have now expired (or we are presently in the twenty first day), since the birth of Jesus, and Daniel speaks of his coming to the Jews to enlighten them of their future, as spiritually occurring, as it was historically,  the next dominant empirical power the ‘Greeks’ succeed the Persians; the very thing that evaded Newton. This being shown in Daniel 10:20 which when translated properly reads, then he (Jesus) said, now you (Daniel) know why he (Michael) will come to help me (Jesus) in returning to battle against the Prince of Persia  and when he comes forth the prince of Greece will come; or more properly,  then he said to me you will understand why he will come to them then, to bring back the battle against the Prince of Persia, and when he comes(into the world) the Prince of Greece will come. The ‘them’ is referring back to Daniel’s request or prayer for his people and the ‘he’ is referencing the angel Michael, (the one who looked like a man in 10:18)

Instead, it is commonly translated and understood, Then said he, knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia and when I am gone forth lo the prince of Grecia shall come.  This makes little sense but then it continues on in Daniel 10:21 However, he (Michael) will show thee (Daniel) that which is noted in the scripture of truth, because there is none that holdeth with me (Jesus) in these things but Michael your prince.  We also see that the flying scroll mentioned by Zechariah 5:2 is said to measure 20 cubits by 10. The scroll is mentioned just after the explanation of the two witnesses in Zechariah and also appears in the ‘prophecy of the curse’ to be held in the hand of Michael the Archangel. The 20 cubits by 10, of the scroll and the 21 days that Michael was ‘withstood’ before he could help, is confirmation of the appearance of the scroll at the end of the ‘Times’ with Michael. This is almost certainly a reference to the period (as we are dealing with prophecy and time) and we can be fairly sure the prophet is not indicating the size of a scroll.  Is the meaning of this 2010 as opposed to 2012 when the scroll is revealed taking into account the vagaries of the Gregorian calendar.

 As we have established the end of the period called the ‘Times’ is the present and this correlates with the fall of Spiritual Jerusalem in conjunction with Michael’s appearance against the kings of Persia. This would appear to be a measure of time that coincides with the 21 days or the 21^st century in which Daniel says that St. Michael is coming forth to help the elect and in addition a scroll, by its dimension, foretells of its arrival in time. This viral or ‘Flying Scroll’ will most likely appear as an internet global phenomenon as there seems to be no other interpretation for this phenomena.

So here we have the confirmation that Michael is referenced as coming at the end of The Times (spiritual time) the beginning of the 21^st day after the 2000 years of the Times. Here is the confirmation that we need for Michael; because as a man who did not appear as a personage in Historical time, he is linked inextricably to the  change from the ‘Times’ to’ Half time’  as prophesied by Daniel.  Michael appearing metaphorically only in historical Time (by the same timeline in the Times) as coming just after the Captivity,(yet historically he did not) because he is spoken of as the branch, as a similitude for Joshua the Chief priest who existed in historical time as we have seen.... ‘Listen, O high priest Joshua and your associates seated before you, who are men symbolic of things to come: I am going to bring my servant, the Branch.’  The confirmation of Michael as one of the witnesses who is to come in the twenty first century who also helps Jesus with the building of the spiritual Temple and who shares this responsibility is seen in Zechariah 6:13.  ‘Even he shall build the temple of the LORD and he shall bear the glory and shall sit and rule upon his throne and he shall be a priest upon his throne and the counsel of peace shall be between them both’.   The ‘both of them’ being referred to are Jesus and the Archangel working together as the two witnesses for three thousand five hundred years as covered earlier.

Now, as the coming out of Egypt is a spiritual stage linked by time, as the stage in an individual’s life when ‘Miraculously’ there is a heightened level of consciousness to ‘belief’ not caused by will or age or any other exterior force, but purely by Grace or the power of the Holy Spirit; so too it is for the Fall of Spiritual Jerusalem; not brought on by exterior circumstance but by the will of God in the time appointed...'the troublous times'.

Zechariah 14:7 But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.  As the paradigm shift in consciousness occurs, (just as it did after Jesus), the Prophets words will be understood as being relevant in the modern era and the relevance of their words will be apprehended as these experiences are cognitively comprehended.

We then find the final confirmation in that, the Destruction of Jerusalem is an event that occurs in an Individual on his gradual- ‘Graal’- steps by degrees toward Gnosis and this event is that which is forewarned by the Prophets from different perspectives and will take place in one day to those who are to become ‘confirmed’ Jews.  This may seem a little contrived to the sceptic, but can only be realised as a truth by analytical cross-referencing of the prophets words which is too lengthy for the present enquiry.

Those who return from Babylon are akin to attaining the Grail. The fall of Jerusalem signals a point in Time for an individual as the start of the 7 year spiritual captivity as it did the 70 year historical captivity for the Jews as in Daniel 9:24, ‘Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy’.  The prophet here is making his reference plain as alluding to spiritual elevation. This is speaking of an individual’s spiritual center and Jerusalem as the holy city within.  It is confirming that as the Captivity wrought obedience to the law after the seventy years with the ensuing realization that all the prophets had spoken the truth...... and so too is it to occur again in the individual. The confirmation or proof of which, to the Jews was by what had transpired in their captivity and thus the prophets words being validated and this same experience is now to be apprehended individually in the spiritual context.

 Really the outcome of the experience for the individual is the same as it was for the Jews of the Captivity and here is the validation of the historical value of the period of 'Historical Time', in that it acts as pre-cognition in the individual. It also should validate to the sceptic, the reasons for the work of God appearing as concentrated upon one tribe alone so that his ‘Curious Work’ might be established in consciousness that all men might understand.  The main stumbling block to the sceptic is why the God of one small tribe and the records of his interaction in one specific location, should in any way be relevant to the world as a whole.  Is there any other way of recording this work that started six thousand years ago that it might be understood by every individual.... especially if the cognitive process is part of the Divine revelation? The obvious answer would be to appreciate, how far and wide this Biblical record has now affected more than half of the population of the world.

  We should be reassured of the concept of 'Biblical Time' and that we are not being deluded, because it is again seen in the next verse that follows,  ‘Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and rebuild Jerusalem unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks and at the double (twice) of threescore weeks, it shall be built again, with broad places being cut, in the times of trouble’.

 Most translations have this as ‘Sixty two’ weeks but the essence of the prophecy is spelling out the seven weeks as we know being synonymous with the captivity and also confirming this period in spiritual time as the doubling of that time in Historical Time as occurring at six thousand years in Biblical time. This is saying that the anointed one is coming at the time that is equivalent to the when the seventy years captivity occurred and followed by its equivalent which is the restoration of the spiritual Jew to Spiritual Jerusalem and it is at this time that it is indicated that the Archangel will come. After enduring the seven years of Spiritual captivity (split by three and a half then three and a half) the Jerusalem of the internalised Conscious landscape will be opened up as opposite to restrained or confined (uninhibited, not oppressed).
 Essentially the whole experience that happened to the Jews in Historical time is now undergone on an individual basis by spiritual Jews and these are ‘Troublous times’. This all takes place at the stage when consciousness has reached that period in historical time when the captivity took place and this time is therefore doubled i.e as occurring now in consciousness (replicated) and this happens at the year 6,000(sixty weeks) of Biblical time. We are told to discern this spiritual event when 6,000 years has occurred twice, one as accounted in spiritual time reckoned by Michael helping the Elect in the Medo-persian era coinciding with the passage of 6,000 years of Biblical time to the present era.

 These are inalterable prophecies that eventually will be understood as the next thousand years unfold.  Here, every man is being warned to discern for himself that the destruction of spiritual Jerusalem will come, that these will be times of trouble for the soul and each Jew (from any nation or old religion) will have to endure the seven weeks as the Jews did seventy years in captivity.... and this will happen at the six thousandth year period of Biblical time when 'Historical Time' has been replicated in the Times i.e. what happened in history has now doubled, caught up with itself or synchronised to that point in the ‘Times’ when the captivity took place. This will in fact be the validation (consciously understood) that the prophets words are based not only in History but have their validation in consciousness.

 However, just to be clear, the point at which 'Historical Time' is fully replicated as the first 4,000 years is 2300.AD. So we see that even in the Half Times we are still mirroring to completion the last part of historical time.  What happened in the first three and a half thousand years of the Historical period of Time has been brought into synchronisation with spiritual time to correlate with the captivity, i.e. the Times to the destruction of Jerusalem  because as we have heard, ‘nowhere else will it happen like it happens to Jerusalem’ because in Daniel 9:12 we are told that God will bring ‘upon us a great evil, for under the whole of heaven, it hath not been done as it hath been done upon Jerusalem’.

Finally before leaving what is an immense subject, which we have just briefly skirted over, let us look at Daniel’s other vision of the beasts in Chapter 7, in which Newton was so captivated. Daniel saw. 3 Four great beasts, each different from the others, came up out of the sea. 4“The first was like a lion, and it had the wings of an eagle. I watched until its wings were torn off and it was lifted from the ground so that it stood on two feet like a man, and the heart of a man was given to it.

This is the period in the spiritual sense of the whole of historical Time i.e. the first 4000 years but this also in history is when Daniel wrote the prophecy in the Babylonian period and is typified by the Lion with two wings of Egypt and Babylon and man’s spiritual development up to that point. What makes Man differ from the Animals is the Spirit that has been developed within him by God’s divine hand and the Jew can only be classified as a Jew (in prophetical understanding) based upon two Spiritual occurrences; The coming out of Egypt and a Return from Babylon. These are the two feet which constitute Man i.e. spiritual man. It is within these two events that the heart becomes engraved, where belief and knowledge of the divine are established. 5“And there before me was a second beast, which looked like a bear. It was raised up on one of its sides, and it had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. It was told, ‘Get up and eat your fill of flesh!’

This period in Historical Time is the Medo-Persian period which follows the Babylonian period historically but in the Times which as we have covered (the 2000 year period that follows historical time), this beast signifies the period in which over the last 2000 years, religion has nullified the three Abrahamic religions and likened to a bear, it has consumed the adherents that have practised this dead and lifeless ritualised intellectual simile instead of what should be a very much alive and ‘lived by’ reality. Religion has formalised and liturgised what should in reality be a living entity, rendering it mundane and lifeless and one sided. The three bones signify the Jewish, Christian and Muslim Religions as dead and lifeless. This period like the bear, has consumed many souls for they have not fused with the spirit giving the allusion of only raising up one side i.e. the soul and not the spirit, yet it is in the period of the Times where the saints should be created, but for the most part religion has denied life through dead practices. All is not negative though regarding religion as it has to have been part of the divine plan, otherwise the prophets’ words would not have reached this era. The bear was also given leave to eat its fill of flesh.

6“After that, I looked, and there before me was another beast, one that looked like a leopard. And on its back it had four wings like those of a bird. This beast had four heads, and it was given authority to rule.  This Leopard represents the rapid spread of the Greek empire covering the four corners of the known world circa 320B.C. This was 200 years after Zerubbabel and Joshua the High Priest returned from Babylon and had commenced the foundations of the Second Temple.  Alexander has the dominion of the whole known world and this was given of God, and according to his will, for to who else can it be ascribed, that with thirty thousand men, Alexander should beat an army of six hundred thousand or more and subdue so many kingdoms and nations in the space of just a few years. The four heads of the beast signify the four kingdoms into which the Grecian empire was divided after Alexander's death and the four kingdoms of the Diadochi or "successors" into which the Macedonian empire was divided at the death of Alexander.  The Leopard signifies the intermingling of the races by its spots and is also equitable with the king of Greece who comes after Michael ‘has come forth’ as we saw earlier in a correct translation of Daniel 10:20.

In effect, this brief period is 333 years long from the present era and this is the period that the leopard represents in the beginning of the 1000 year period that is known as Half of the Times or ‘Half Times’. In historical time it coincides with the era before the Roman era. This is the period of the king of Greece, the first part of the seventh and final day of the seven thousand year week.  It is one third of the one thousand year period called ‘Half of Times’, leaving a remainder of 666 years. It coincides with just after Mid-week of Biblical Time that is marked at 500BC.

7“After that, in my vision at night I looked, and there before me was a fourth beast—terrifying and frightening and very powerful. It had large iron teeth; it crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left. It was different from all the former beasts, and it had ten horns.  Most commentators believe this fourth beast is the Roman church and the boastful person is the Pope that has a mouth speaking great things, full of boasting that pretends to unlimited jurisdiction, professing infallibility, promising to absolve from all sins and threatening to send to everlasting destruction all kings, kingdoms, and individuals, who would dare to dispute his power and authority. The Pope certainly looks like a candidate but he is no different from the other religions, but the beast was diverse from all the beasts that were before it. Daniel does not specify particularly in what respects it was different, for he does not attempt to give its appearance. It was not a lion, a bear, or a leopard, but he does not say precisely what it was. These were kingdoms or empires which existed before the advent of Jesus and the Roman era. Whereas the other kingdoms consist of only one material, this fourth beast consists of two, iron and clay(that which is corrupt mixed with that which has been moulded) on which much stress is laid, Da 2:41-43.  In Daniel 2:39 he tells the king “After you, another kingdom will rise, inferior to yours. Next, a third kingdom, one of bronze, will rule over the whole earth. 40Finally, there will be a fourth kingdom, strong as iron—for iron breaks and smashes everything—and as iron breaks things to pieces, so it will crush and break all the others.

The fourth beast is the consciousness of Man that still has no knowledge of God. It has been made from the earth and like clay, has been moulded by divine intervention, but the will of man is as strong as iron and easily corroded. Some men in this era will still not accept that they live within a divine plan. The iron teeth are synonymous with the iron legs of the statue and feed on shame and corruptness and the same mix is also reiterated in the statues feet being partly of iron and partly of baked clay. The elect will be those who duly believe with this heightened consciousness.

At present we are entering the period of the third beast, it is in this period that Michael comes forth to unite the three Abrahamic religions in to one horn which again will be formalised and corrupted but here in terms of empire periods being replicated in consciousness it is the commencement of the Greek period. At 2333AD, ‘Historical time’ will be synchronised with the ’Times’ of the last two thousand years plus 333 years of the final day as this is a continuum of progression in consciousness as a reflection of the past. This is the time of the appearance of the fourth beast, which is diverse from all the others in that it is constructed from, or is a reflection of,  the two previous time periods but also including the first 333 years of its own period which is a third of the last thousand year period. This is relative to and indicative of the time of the sounding of the angels in Revelation 8:6 where the final seven hundred years are accounted with each missing a third of their own time.

The one horn being formed or replacing the other three that came before it, is synonymous with a formalised or intellectualised new consciousness that replaces the three old religions that has become corrupted since Michael came with his message just as the church corrupted the message of Jesus. The ten horns indicate the evolution of religion and the will of man   that has contrived them and in another sense concurring with the ten toes upon which the edifice of man’s consciousness stands constituted by the empires.

8“While I was thinking about the horns, there before me was another horn, a little one, which came up among them; and three of the first horns were uprooted before it. This horn had eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth that spoke boastfully. This is interesting in that it predicts the usual misunderstanding of religion after the three have been united and this is probably personified as being the antichrist.   It then continues on, 11 Then I continued to watch because of the boastful words the horn was speaking. I kept looking until the beast was slain and its body destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire. 12 The other beasts had been stripped of their authority, but were allowed to live for a period of time.

13“In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

15“I, Daniel, was troubled in spirit, and the visions that passed through my mind disturbed me. 16 I approached one of those standing there and asked him the true meaning of all this.

“So he told me and gave me the interpretation of these things: 17‘The four great beasts are four kingdoms that will rise from the earth. The last kingdom being  the last 666 years, 18 But the saints of the Most High will receive the kingdom and will possess it forever—yes, for ever and ever.’

19“Then I wanted to know the true meaning of the fourth beast, which was different from all the others and most terrifying, with its iron teeth and bronze claws.

 The bronze claw was not mentioned earlier, but since the bronze era of Greece (as part of the earlier statue of man), is part of the one thousand years, it is incorporated into the forth beast.  The first beast was the Egyptian and Babylonian period. The second beast was the Medo-Persian both of these having their reflection in spiritual growth during the ‘Times’ i.e. the last 2000 years. However the third beast is representative of the short lived Greek world dominion and occurs in the same ‘half times’ as the forth beast. the beast that crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left. 20 I also wanted to know about the ten horns on its head and about the other horn that came up, before which three of them fell—the horn that looked more imposing than the others and that had eyes and a mouth that spoke boastfully. 21 As I watched, this horn was waging war against the saints and defeating them, 22  until the Ancient of Days came and pronounced judgment in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came when they possessed the kingdom.  The time of the saints possession of the Kingdom commences 666 years before the end of Biblical time.  Those who do not still believe, even being part of the heightened consciousness of mankind, will not inherit the promise of eternal life but it is individual choice within this framework that is fated or pre-ordinated by Time that  divide the saint, the Jew or the sheep from the evil, the rebellious and the goat.

23“He gave me this explanation: ‘The fourth beast is a fourth kingdom that will appear on earth. It will be different from all the other kingdoms and will devour the whole earth, trampling it down and crushing it. 24 The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings. 25 He will speak against the Most High and oppress his saints and try to change the set times and the laws. The saints will be handed over to him for a time, times and half a time.

The ten horns are part of the fourth beast and it will exist in the ‘half of Times’; it is diverse from the rest, in that it is not constructed nor does it wholly mirror historical Time, but it is mostly mirroring the Times as the fourth beast is equivalent to the Roman empire, the Greek period of 333 being in the same time period of ‘half time’ as the 666, which is what constitutes the fourth beast. So the fourth beast is in effect, mirroring part of the ‘Times’ if one followed linearly that which transpired in historical Time as it progressed into the Times as the Roman Empire did as the progression is in continuum. It is this that differentiates it from the other three beasts in that those first three directly mirror historical time and no other is a mirror for the most part of the Times from which it is derived. So very much so ,it is unlike the others when it comes to fruition in that it is third generational and is comprised of much that is built in consciousness in the Times. A bit complicated but this is the convoluted process by which man is brought to Gnosis.

In the one thousand years that remain, once the 333 years have passed, the fourth beast will come and this subdues the first beast (the Egypt and Babylon period from historical time); the second beast (the Medo –Persian from the Times) and the third beast (the Greek from half times). These which are the constructs or ‘make up’ of man’s consciousness, which has been built up in, Time ,the times and half time, will be now overpowered becoming part of the new elevated consciousness of Mankind.

26 But the court will sit, and his power will be taken away and completely destroyed forever. 27 Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be handed over to the saints, the people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him.’

Chapter 18

The consequences of the unveiling of History

What, is the outcome of such an investigation and how are we to be benefited, now that we are to be made cognizant that mankind is part of a Divine plan?  The answer to which is ‘much and in every way’ as St. Paul answered to the question of the Merits of being a Jew. ‘Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God’.  As we have seen, a Jew can only be understood in the non-Religious sense as one spiritually to have come out of Egypt and also to have submitted after the fall of the Spiritual Jerusalem to certain knowledge of the existence of God. This is the true definition of a spiritual Jew.

As is evident today, religion as a whole has carried out one function that can be accounted as positive for the modern era in that, without religious bodies, we would never have had this ancient knowledge passed down through the generations. Even though corrupted in part, there would be no conceptual starting point or reference for a basis for Gnosis.  All religions are equally futile in the modern era because God’s Law has permeated across the world by means of conscience and those Laws which it obeys, have permeated the many religions with cultural additions.  Unless the Gradual steps up to the Temple are understood as man’s heritage and potential (and there are no shortcuts), the world in all its materialism will go on killing and travailing in vain.

Drugs are the substitute for the inane in their search for the Divine, refusing belief and confounded in their own subtlety.  We should understand that all people are programmed to quest for understanding, but they short circuit themselves by their own will against what the work of God has engraved upon them, and therefore losing the battle against themselves.

How may we be certain that God has left his message to be understood in the scriptures that follow one tribe that emanates from Judah? The first thing to look at, is how many people have these scriptures affected and how is it, (apart from cultural differences and individual nations endemic corruption of the Law), that we have a United Nations establishment in which each can criticize the others non adherence to what is a common understanding of right and wrong, yet is driven by perspective.

 If it were not for fundamentalism within the United Nations, the problem of Israel could be negotiated to a peaceful settlement. The different nations have varying propensities to rationalize what are essentially, a code of ethics which are understood in every country. This rationalisation is the cause of disagreement, but when all nations understand that Man’s development is within a Divine plan, the world view will be less divisive. The Law given to all those who came out of Egypt is the very benchmark and bedrock by which all the nations judge and critique each other and acts as a testimony to measure how much they stray from adherence to an engraved conscience. The corruption that occurred culturally by the individual nations rationalisation of the Law, has distorted what was innately imprinted as conscience.

 Even those who have never heard of the God of the Jews, by the works of God find eligibility as inheritors by adherence to what is indelibly engraved on the heart of every man and for this asset Mankind as a whole is indebted to the Jewish Diaspora.  Even if there is no cognition of the allegorization of the Divine plan which is written in the Bible,  the coming out of allegorical Egypt into belief is accounted as the first step to the enlightenment of the individual whether the individual is cognisant of this, or not. This, as we have tried to elucidate in these pages, is a form of template, created by Man’s history since the intervention of what we call God, and can be seen in the very facet of the replication of our past as we evolve spiritually, not only through Absolute time, (that which governs the laws of physics which are immutable..... the very mechanics of the universe); not only through Lineal time, (that which we can grasp such as age and through which we measure time, leading to understanding evolution and relative geological periods),  but also Biblical Time, (that by which we might understand the story of Mankind, by locating ourselves within a framework  that otherwise is too vast to comprehend, by means of orientation).

Without the intelligible concept of the Seven thousand Years, man has no way to orientate himself until full gnosis is achieved, this being the very reason for a time frame that not only can be referenced, but understood in terms of pre-cognition. The aim of the story that we have been presented by God in the scriptures has been the story of Mankind since God’s intervention to raise consciousness by his spirit and 'his story' has become our history. Ishmael and Edom have become allegories in part of that story forming part of our history as they also were of the Abrahamic tree but now have become synonymous with the Choice mechanism within a fated directive or blueprint for the benefit of Mankind.

 For the modern man, there is only one qualification, the only disqualification is non-belief.  Belief is what every major religion professes to teach, yet they have become dead, almost becoming culpable of misdirection through over intellectualisation of what is essentially a life experience for the living. Belief is to be lived by those blessed with this spirit before it is deadened. To give but one example of belief and adherence to the law as either being dead or alive it is worth looking at the nations. Some nations with the highest number of ‘Believers’ per capita are recognisably the most corrupt of all the Nations, yet other nations with a secular culture and without a propensity to religious practice have sometimes a high adherence to the Law. This is the conundrum of ‘Belief’, but in what do people believe and how is it outwardly gauged.

 Religion seems to be the metaphorical beast, the Dragon that needs to be slayed so that men might live through the Law rather that in slavish obedience to it; to obey or submit to what has been inscribed on those nations or individuals who obey the law. God is no respecter of persons or nations...... which is plainly seen through the plight of the Jews through the millennia and the starving nations which exist across the globe. The only meritorious possession of Man is the spiritual part of him that fuses with the soul at the advent of belief and this will live and always be prized by God. The cycle of soul returning in the mass of bodies that cover the globe travailing and questing toward the temple within the Holy city, within a time frame of seven thousand years and according to a divine plan, is the only way or path that is revealed to Mankind and we are innately programmed, yet given choice. Belief, then obedience, followed by enlightenment or contrarily non-belief then despair followed by death. It is therefore exposed and made plain that those nations which witness the most turmoil are those furthest from the law.

A common view of the atheist is, “why if God is omnipotent, does he allow such carnage?” The answer can only be viewed as Man’s ability to destroy himself by non-belief and a nation’s inherent, non-adherence to the law through corruption, becoming part of its own self-destruction.  Finally, as the world order stands today, is it not a strange coincidence that the most probable cause for the next global war is religion? We are in a better position to understand the dilemmas of religious differences if we can understand the reality of our pre-programming which is evident in the scriptures of the Jews.

However, it is the Jews who live in Israel who seem to be the most likely cause of the next religious war. This is not implying that it is the current generations doing but rather the misunderstanding of the prophets by their forebears who flocked to be near Jerusalem believing that it was still the holy place of which the prophets spoke. Equally the Palestinian intolerance of their presence has exacerbated the problem over the years to arrive at the present impasse.

  This situation has been inflamed by the religious incompetents, that pretend to the Levitical inheritance from many nations.  The contention spurred on by the sub-conscious knowledge that the religious leaders from many nations have no inheritance in the spiritual Promised Land. The priests-the Levites, and all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel, Therefore shall they have no inheritance among their brethren.

 The only solution is integration through new understanding, Palestinian with those who now live in Israel, sharing their portion of the Earth.  If the Jews in Israel had knowledge of the real Jerusalem that should be their inheritance and potential, they would share the land and live in harmony as potential co- inheritors of a much Holier Promised Land.  The divine plan is greater than building the third temple on the same outdated piece of earth that has now lost its initial significance.

 Jerusalem has been fought over for generations through religious ignorance, because once in history it housed the Ark of the Covenant in its Temple.  The Temple is no longer there, but Jerusalem has become the blueprint for the spiritual land.  The Promised Land that the third temple will occupy is the inheritance of every man led to Gnosis by adherence to the Law through the certain knowledge of God, as consciousness comes to fruition over the next thousand years.

 It would be of no surprise that the book of the Law and the Ark of the Covenant have been deposited in the tomb by the Templars which remain there along with the body of Jesus and Joseph of Arimathea.  It may be the unveiling of this tomb as Melkin attests or the witness of this event on a Global scale predicting devotion at the shrine.... that will bring  in a new understanding and possibly peace to the Nations.

Chapter 19

Tracing the Celtic cult of St. Michael.

The modern status of the Island, that has played such a large part in our investigation, is that it presently has a hotel on it owned by a couple who have refused any meeting with the author.  The author is well aware of the position of the tomb entrance given by Melkin’s precise directions, but after several cordial requests and emails requesting a meeting to discuss the evidence presented within these pages, sadly the owners, have not seen fit to consider hearing what might be uncovered.  However, until they allow this discovery to take place, the world will remain uninformed as to what lies within the island. 

Now we are acquainted with what the island contains and the contents future role in the elevation of consciousness, it seems certain the tomb will be exposed eventually. For the present, the owners of Burgh Island have stated that they have no interest in this book or what it uncovers.  If Melkin’s prediction is correct that ‘When his tomb is discovered, it will be seen whole and untouched and will be open to the whole world’...... it might prove at that time to be a matter that should have been considered. 
 It is hoped however, that progress is allowed to take place, to uncover these relics for the good of Mankind.  It appears that when the present owners first bought Burgh Island, they attempted to banish walkers promenading to the summit of the Island.  Apparently local reaction fought against such a ban and holidaymakers and hikers were allowed back on the island, albeit with limited access.  This may be the cause for their dismissive attitude, but the author tried three times to make contact with the owners of the island personally and through his agent, but unfortunately, there has been no co-operation up to the time of writing.  

 

Thus the situation remains, but can the knowledge of what lies within this island be traced back to a religious house that was first established long ago in Britain and was known before the Norman conquest as a 'St. Michael' establishment and referred to as ‘St. Michael by the Sea’.

 Burgh Island has many names as we have uncovered in these pages, but seems to have been linked to the monks of Mont-Saint-Michel by an early charter.  This Charter tried to establish ownership of this island from a very early date, but like the many strange twists of fate that have occurred in history that have been elucidated within this book regarding this island in Devon...... somehow the notoriety of the tomb within this island was confused with St. Michael’s mount in Cornwall.

 It appears that our story concerning Melkin does not stop here as traces of his influence are left upon Mont-Saint-Michel after he had buried Arthur and settled there.  It appears, if we follow the dots, he secured the tomb at Burgh Island and set off to France.  The evidence tends to indicate that a small hermitage of some sort existed on Burgh Island when he departed and remained there as a sentinel to watch over this Sacred Isle and its contents.  The echoes today, still persisting in the rumour that a monastic building once existed at Burgh Island.  We also must not forget that, before Melkin left for France he must have written the book containing his striclty British riddle, otherwise it would not have been extant in Britain at the time of John of Glastonbury.  Melkin’s puzzle did not come back from France as part of the romance material as some modern commentators imply by thinking its thirteenth century fraudulent composition is based upon Grail literature. In fact it compliments French literature insomuch as it speaks of Avalon and Joseph of Arimathea and confirms the basis of Grail literature. Most commentators today do not give Melkin's prophecy as the reason for perpetrating the hoax to find Arthur at Glastonbury as we have covered. 
 It should be considered also, that Melkin, when giving us directions to the entrance of the tomb has guided us ‘high up in Ictis near to where one prays’ and this instruction was given at least six hundred years before the Templars managed to build their chapels and churches.

 If Melkin had left Britain around the death of Arthur having written his British books, one of which contained his riddle, it would explain why no specific Grail material was circulating in Britain except for his other mundane Arthurian accounts from which the Welsh tradition is largely derived.
 What if Melkin had in fact written his Grail book in France and the source of Helinand’s material, who recounts the apparition of an angel occurring to a hermit in Britain...... rather occurred to a British Hermit in France. It does seem more probable that a French source speaking of a British Hermit connected with the Grail is more likely to hear of the account of an apparition that transpired in France or from the British monk that had arrived in France. This becomes more probable when Helinand’s source gives the outcome of the apparition as the explanation of the source of the account concerning the Graal...... and this Graal account in many forms, emanated from France.
The Graal was an object concerning Jesus, the ‘matter’ of which transpired in Britain. Melkin known to be British is responsible for the 'Matière de Bretagne' more than any other possible source having left us the puzzle in Britain which deals with the same two subjects Joseph and Jesus and also the common ground of Avalon. But here it gets interesting in that.... if we examine the evidence, it does seem that the apparition of presumably the Archangel Michael to Melkin is the real source for the name of Mont-Saint-Michel.
The sceptic who is dubious of angelic apparitions should remember that it is the only explanation offered as to the transfer of the hidden knowledge. This occult information  is essentially the purport of the Graal i.e the spiritual ascension toward the temple which was misconstrued as a quest in the romances.
The belief that a angel transferred this occult knowledge is more logically counteracted if we  assume Melkin found the occult manuscript evidence in the tomb. This he would have added to his account of Joseph's arrival in Britain that was also contained in the Book of the Grail. So we should  assume that Melkin would have  seen the Grail Ark...... discovered the information about Joseph’s Journey and the occult knowledge which was the essence of the Graal that had originated in Jerusalem. Was it Melkin though that offered such an apparition by way of explanation of his source?

 Let us assume that due to Saxon pressure Melkin took the same route as countless émigrés before him to France and had landed near or on the Island of Mont-Saint-Michel.  Perhaps the similarity of a tidal Island prompted the original naming of the Island that he had just left (i.e Burgh Island being referred to as St. Michael by the sea)...... and it was now to be bestowed upon the Norman mount. 
 We can never know if an apparition of an Angel occurred to Melkin or simply this was posited as an explanation for the appearance of the most extraordinary account of how Melkin had become aware of truths that could not be muttered overtly.
The account that Melkin would have found in the tomb gave witness concerning two of the most sacred personages in recent history and like the prophets in Biblical literature, the profundity of what was related as occult material was largely misinterpreted. The quest or occult nature of the Grail was mixed with accounts of Joseph's arrival by the early troubadours. The account was beautiful  but not fully understood (exept by Melkin) and hence the Grail Ark object became the Graal which was the occult spiritual story. 
 The subliminal information regarding the Shroud and the tomb of the unknown occupant in the Perlesvaus is glaringly obvious once we understand that the body of Jesus is on Avalon. However, since Melkin did not divulge this in the Grail book none of the troubadours understood how the Jerusalem or arcane literature interacted with the account of Joseph's arrival at Sarras.

It seems that by the knowledge of what exists upon Burgh Island and its obvious connection with the Archangel (based upon the foreknowledge exposed by the Prophets and Revelation)....... is the real  reason for the appellation of Mont-Saint-Michel or association with St. Michael. The Templars simply perpetuating this link in Britain by dedicating all their churches to the same Archangel to elucidate and highlight the line from which we are directed to Avalon. How the Templars found the islands location is debatable. Either they cracked Melkin's code in his puzzle or more likely in the Grail book that they possesed there were more clues as to Avalons location.
 It seems probable that originally the reason that Mont-Saint-Michel, known as Mons Tumba or the Mount of the Tomb from a very ancient time (without containing a tomb) derived this appellation because of the echo of someone’s knowledge of what a similar island in Britain contained.  This name of Mons Tumba is likely to be an echo of a British connection long before the ‘Revelatio’ of Mont-Saint-Michel was written that purports to relate the legends of the French mount's founding. To the skeptic this may just appear as supposition but again if we follow the dots the French island appears to have echoes of a similar insular British mount containing the tomb.  The British Hermit that gave us the story of the Grail (which subliminally is all about the tomb) was supposedly given it (according to Helinand's source) by the Archangel Michael.

  There can be no certainty of the Melkin connection to Mont-Saint-Michel, but it becomes apparent that the hermitage set up on Mont-Saint-Michel is in imitation and honour of the British Tomb.  Obviously this connection has become very unclear through the ages, but what other place would warrant such a name given the magnitude of what the British tomb contains within it, if indeed Melkin found himself at Mont-Saint-Michel wishing to commemorate the British island. Especially when we consider that there is no good reason for the Norman Mount having this name. 
 A possible first port of call on the French coast by Melkin could have been Mont-Saint-Michel and could be the location from which Helinand’s French source relates that a hermit or monk had a revelation from the Archangel...... from which extract as we have covered, the earliest mention of the Graal was recorded. So let us see how all this fits together.

Figure 73 Showing Mont-Saint-Michel near Avranche in Normandy, the Island that is intimately connected with St. Michael’s Mount in Cornwall and the Sacred Isle of Avalon with its associations with St. Michael.

Mont-Saint-Michel became known as (or was referred to) as ‘St. Michael in Periculo Maris’ or St. Michael in danger of the sea. The earliest reference to the Island is probably found in the ‘Vita Paterni’ where the island is not actually definitively described in the script.  However one may deduce that it is connected with a monastery called ‘Maudane’ and this existed upon Mont-Saint-Michel. 
 In around 600AD 'La Vita Paterni' was written and it included in it a story of 'St. Pair' and 'Scubilion' his friend in anecdotal passages, both monks from d’Ansion near Poitou, Anjou and Aquitaine. ‘Scubilion était retenu malade au monastère de Maudane, quand il fut invité à visiter Pair; mais un bras de mer l’empêcha de traverser durant la nuit.’  Scubilion was taken ill while at the monastery of Maudane when he had been invited to visit Pair, but an arm of the sea had prevented him from crossing during the night.

 Although this in no way states that the monastery was on the island of Mont-Saint-Michel, it certainly intonates that the prevention from crossing was caused by the tide. St. Pair was Bishop of Avranches and assisted at the council of Paris between 557 and 573 with Scubilion. ‘Saint-Pair–sur-Mer’ is just at the edge of the diocese of Avranches and Coutances.  ‘Scubilion se trouvait à trois milles environ d’Avranches loorsqu’il se vit arête par le flux’.  Scubilion also was said to be three miles from Avranche when he was detained by the tide and not by coincidence this is the distance over to the mainland across the tidal sand going east on the way to Avranches from Mont-Saint-Michel. 
 Although the Island is not named, it does look as if a monastery existed on the island given the above coincidences and the name of the monastery was called ‘Maudane’.  Mordain or Mordrain sounds very familiar in pronounciation to Maudane and in the ‘Estoire del saint Graal the vulgate cycle of French Arthurian prose romances we find this name given to King Evalak after he had been converted by Joseph of Arimathea. His new name appears on his forehead Mordrain-Mordains after he receives Christianity (the new religion) and later, contrary to a commandment given by God.... when he looks on the Holy Grail, he becomes blind and paralyzed as a consequence.  He then retires penitent to a hermitage and erects there an abbey of white monks.
 So was the monastery set up by King Evalak or possibly Melkin around 600AD and recorded by the poet Fortunat Venance as the monastery of ‘Maudane’. All of this is supposition as the monastery that Evalak established could well be the rumoured one on Burgh Island. However we have nothing to link Melkin with Mont-Saint-Michel directly, but the Count of Pitou, Eleanor of Aquitaine’s father, probably the first Troubadour in the accepted tradition, comes from the same environs as St. Pair and Scubilion are said to have come from before arriving in Avranches.

 Guillaume de St. Pair tells us of two chapels built on Mont-Saint-Michel one dedicated to St. Symphorien constructed at the bottom and St. Etienne at the top. These are the first buildings recorded on the Island of Mont-Saint-Michel which prior to when the Revelatio was written...... is known as Mons Tumba or Le Mont Tombe.   Both of these saints to whom the churches were dedicated have their tombs elsewhere.
 There is no record of a Tomb on the Island and we hear no other record of the history of the island until what is recorded in the 'Revelatio' in which St. Aubert is recorded as the founder. St. Aubert  having stones cleared for the construction of a Monastery....... on the same Mont-Saint-Michel  to which by the previous account, Scubilion had just visited his friend Pair in a monastery. 
 So it looks as if the account of St.Aubert establishing the monastery in 708-9 can be discounted as fictitious.  But let us look at a few extracts given in the account of the 'Revelatio' as to how it views its own foundations and associations with the cult of the Archangel.

'Now it should be noted here the miracle through which he (The Archangel) foreswore for humans a place in the western world, where a fervent throng of the faithful could congregate reverently from all over the world to beg angelic assistance. This place is called Tumba by the local inhabitants. As if emerging on high from the sands of the shore, it rises upward two hundred cubits in the manner of a burial mound. The place, situated in a bay where the rivers Segia and Senuna flow together, is surrounded by the ocean.  A narrow causeway extends from the island outward in a remarkable manner, opening up for the inhabitants for a short time. In length and in width from its base to its peak, it is not dissimilar (so it is thought) from that bulwark where is guarded the ascendance of the human race'.

 Who it might be asked, thinks also that this Island of Mont-Saint-Michel is similar to another that guards within its bulwark the ascendancy of the Human race. Is the scribe who wrote the Revelatio conversant with a rumour regarding who might lie within a similar island.

 'Lying six miles distant from the city of Avranches and facing down toward the west, it divides the countryside of Avranches from Brittany. No mundane action can be undertaken here, for this place is pleasent only to those who are disposed to worship Christ diligently, and the site receives those whom the burning love of virtue are drawn toward the highest heaven. What an enormous quantity of fish is found there, brought together by the flux of the many rivers and the sea. The island appears to be nothing other than a large pinnacle to those looking upon it from nearby. But, as the sea receeds from it twice during the day, a convenience for devoted people, a path opens for those seeking the entrance of the blessed Archangel Michael. This place, as we can know from truthful accounts, was at first separated from the ocean and tide by the darkest forest  at a distance of six miles, offering very secluded hiding places for wild animals'.

A similar account of a flooding by the sea of a forest or woodland exists at St. Michael’s Mount in Cornwall which has been transferred from the French tradition as we shall see shortly.  St Michael’s mount’s account is probably founded on this tale as both intone these events occurred in living memory, but archeologically both mounts have existed isolated since before the modern era. However it is because of this transferred French tradition about the island being within a forest and this same record existing at St. Michael's mount...... that has led some Ictis investigators to discount the Island as Ictis. However, they have discounted it on a fallacious premise even though it never was Ictis.

'But this place was made ready by the will of God, for the veneration of his holy Archangel, by means of a miracle performed by the sea. Though it lay then some distance away, rising up little by little, it eventually obliterated with its strength the whole area of the forest and reduced it all into the appearance of sand. Thus it opened a pathway to the people of the earth, so that they might remark upon the works of God. In truthfulness we may tell how the Prince of the blessed spirits dedicated this place by angelic revelation. Once when he had gone to sleep the most religious and beloved by God, Aubert, Bishop of Avranches, was advised by an angelic revelation that at that time he should construct a church in honor of the Archangel at the summit of this holy place. Here the venerable festival that is observed in Monte Gargano would be celebrated with no less rejoicing in this sea'.

 Here we can see the scribe of the 'Revelatio' is associating Mont-Saint-Michel by linking back to  an apparition by Michael that took place in Mont Gargano. Yet, if St. Aubert had actually recieved his own vision what would be the point in constantly reminding us of this relationship.  

'Now, at this very same time a thief with a depraved nature had lead away a bull that  belonged to the Bishop and placed it on the summit of this very rock. Aubert, who had lost the bull, despaired of finding it. The evil robber accomplished a lucrative crime at the Bishop's expense. Meanwhile the venerable bishop who had been instructed twice was struck severely by a third admonition to go with haste to a place he knew not and there carry out his orders. As a confirmation of his faith it is still shown in this place even to this day, a stone (like the impression of a man’s finger), upon which the memorable Bishop sat whenever he supervised the work until its completion.  Here we can see a near replication of an account given for the establishment of Monte Gargano'.

'The Bishop found the site pleasing and was told by angelic intercession to construct the church on that spot where the bull secretly was tied up. And when Aubert inquired about the size and dimensions of the place, he learned that he should comprise for the area for the building where he saw the steer  tread down a circle with its feet. After this it was commanded that the stolen steer be returned to its owner. Therefore the venerable Bishop, reassured by the vision, entered the foretold spot with hymns and praises to carry out the task'.

 Again, a near replication of the account given in the founding on Monte Gargano, even using the same animal to portray the account is a confirmation that Gargano is being used as a sacred shrine on which to base the French mounts sanctity. This whole account is being contrived as an apology by the scribe....... as a method of accounting for the association of Michael with the present name of the Island. The construction of the Revelatio is purely a devise to account for the name of the Island at the time the scribe wrote.

'He wished to imitate the shape of that shrine on Monte Gargano as a habitation made from rock broken up from the earth and made ready in an angelic manner for the praise and glory of God. Here he taught openly that the task of divine reward must always be taken up in the heavens, and also to penetrate the high stars of the heavens, it should be by the inner experience of contemplation, and not to the place of the lusting hearts of humans in earthly and muddy swamps. After only a short time, with God forwarding the work and the structure built, Aubert remained disquieted since he lacked relics of the holy archangel. The blessed Michael advised the Bishop how he should send monks quickly all the way to Monte Gargano, where the festival of the holy Archangel was observed most reverently. They should bring back that blessing which, with the patronage of the angel, Aubert might receive with the greatest thanksgiving'.

 The hopelessness of the scribe is evident in his inability to be more inventive and portrays the necessity to establish relics that would draw pilgrims to the French Mount. If St. Aubert had received a vision himself at the mount, why one asks, would it be necessary to associate with the only known other famed Michaeline site..... unless one’s own apparition story is unsubstantiable.

There were gathered from that place (Monte Gargano) relics fitting for veneration, with which the archangel had commended his remembrance to the faithful. One was a piece of a little red hooded cape which the celebrated Aarchangel himself had placed in the grotto of Monte Gargano upon the altar that he with his own hand had built. The other was a bit of the marble upon which he stood where even until now, footprints are visible. The aforesaid brothers carried back to that sacred place (Mont-Saint-Michel) the patronage of the archangel. Those with whom Michael had associated by angelic revelation he would now eternally bind by the bond of love. After many days on the road the great messengers returned on the very day on which the building work was completed on Monte Tumba.  Here they entered into what seemed a new world, for when they had departed the location was filled with a thicket of briars.

  The sole gambit of this concocted account (written 150 years after the events it portrays) is specifically to attract pilgrims and to provide in explanatory form, how the Island at the time of writing was named after the Archangel. It in no way offers a credible reason (except for the shape of the island) why at the same time it was also called Mons Tumba.

However there is a British Island where we know the most famous tomb to exist and after such an illustrious history, seems to have become known as ‘St. Michael by the sea’.  This appears to have been it’s name before the small hermitage was disbanded and the Island’s secret became lost in time.  The hermitage on Burgh Island seems to have disappeared but it will become clearer that the link between the two islands seems to have been recorded long before the Norman invasion.
  There is good reason to suppose that the small monastic group of Hermits that existed upon Mont-Saint-Michel before the year 966, had in their possession, recorded information about its sister Island (where their order had their roots) in Britain. At this stage The French mount was still within Brittany (little Britain).  Possibly, from an early date, a Celtic group (based upon Melkin’s knowledge) had seeked some kind of Papal or royal dispensation regarding ownership of the British island that contained the tomb. 
  If a celtic established order had seeked ownership of the old Ictis, it would be safe to say that they were not entirely sure of what it held, but it seems fair to establish that there were echoes of a tomb.  If a dispensation was sought by the Celtic body of monks that had maintained a memory of what the British Island contained, possibly they wished to make claim to it for the French mount.  It would then follow that this desire must have been based upon some previous information.

As we have seen the cult of St. Michael seems to have been revitalized in the time of the Templars.  However, with what has been discussed regarding the Archangel’s part in the Divine Plan, it would seem that Burgh island and the discovery of its contents must be inextricably linked to the Archangel Michael.  This association is derived from the prophets and it is the understanding of his part to be played out in 'Time' related by Daniel and Revelation which we can connect with the next shift in consciousness.
  This will inevitably follow from the discovery of Jesus’ remains and the establishment of the truths related in the prophets.  The discovery will of course substantiate that the shroud was in fact Jesus’s grave cloth and establish the veracity of the Passion of Jesus.  The part played by The Archangel seems to be the reason that the Templar array of churches were all dedicated to him so that, by association this unveiling may be made at the appointed time in ‘Biblical Time’. 
 It is the understanding of and belief in the Archangel’s association with this shift in consciousness that we can assume that Burgh Island from Melikin’s time has been associated with Michael. 
 This is possibly the reason for the unknown reference of ‘St. Michael by the sea’ in a charter from Edward the Confessor and ‘Consecratio Michaelis archangeli ecclesiae’ as recorded in the Welsh Annals under 718AD,  and is probably the explanation for the Michael appellation and dedication existing at the French mount.

 The 'Revelatio' pretends to offer a credible account of the founding of Mont-Saint-Michel, but it might be more of an attempt to establish the mounts history from a local aspect using St. Aubert (a local venerated persona).    This positions being fabricated by the scribe having no previous history available to him and no historical provenance to fit with his current perception. The 'Revelatio' could also be just a devise that positively discriminates against a 'Celtic' in favour of a 'Roman' inheritance.
If the French mount's history was Celtic or Bretton, possibly he was only interested in establishing a more Norman provenance. It is also a possibility  also that the scribe of the Revalatio knew there was a whiff of association with a celtic establishment of the Michael tradition that had come from Burgh Island. It could be the scribe was trying to disassociate with any British connection. Maybe this was the reason for the mounts name and  he wished to establish themselves being derived from a strictly Roman source. The original scribe of the 'Revalatio' could simply have invented the connection with Gargano as a Roman or eastern Michael had more 'credibility' for the pilgrims he wished to attract.

We can never know the scribes reasons for establishing his version, but taking into account what we have seen already, we can establish that the mount was named after Michael and it also was associated with a Tomb (hence the name) and the account is obviously fabricated.

 However the Revelatio is the starting point of the accepted history of Mont-Saint-Michel as witnessed in the Cartulary.  The Cartulary of Mont-Saint-Michel better known as the work contained in MS. 210 of the Bibliothèque municipale d'Avranches is an exceptional medieval manuscript that has undergone the most minute scrutiny over the ages by many Scholars.
 It is basically a document that purports to expound upon the history and the practices of the Mont since its inception by St. Aubert in 709 AD. Apart from the section known as the ‘Historia’ that gives an explanation of the politics and religious interactions between the Breton and Norman ducal houses it basically fills the historical gap until the establishment of 'cannons' (religious monks) that later became displaced by the Benedictine establishment.

 St. Michael is the patron saint of mariners but in this famous sanctuary at Mont-Saint-Michel in the Diocese of Coutances, he is said to have appeared there, in 708-9 to St. Aubert, Bishop of Avranches. As we have seen it is he who is credited with founding Mont-Saint-Michel.
 However the St. Michael appelation appears to have pre-existed the Revelatio and took on this name subsequently to its prior appelation of Maudane. It is here that we might establish a connection with Melkin. It is this supposition that the islands name originated by a small contingent of ex British monks that had left a similar Island in Britain that appears to be the real answer.
 It was this original commune from Britain that invested the French mount with traditions leading to its two most prominent appelations today; that of the mount of the tomb and the mount of St. Michael.  This view becomes more feasible if the Angel who appeared to the Hermit in Helinand’s account about the Grail was Michael and by the fact that if St. Aubert had been buried there, much veneration would have been made of this tomb in the Revelatio when it was written around 800-850AD.

There is no reasonable historical record of how the Mont got its name until the propagandist rationalisation of the 'Revelatio' was compiled sometime in the late eighth or ninth century more than a hundred years after Aubert’s death.  At this time the unimaginative Monk who wrote it, without a real understanding of the initial founding of his Monastery, invented a story that purports to give reason for the Islands affiliation to Michael.  The whole episode of the apparition of the Archangel Michael was heaped upon St. Aubert giving the necessary sacred credentials to establish the mount as having been named after the Archangel’s appearance there.

 It seems that St. Aubert lived in France during the reign of Childebert III (695-711) and died in 720 but there are certain passages in the 'Introductio Monachorum' (another part of the Cartulary) which may shed doubt on this date. The legend perpetuated in the 'Revelatio' (as we saw above) relates that in 708  the saint had a vision in which the Archangel Michael instructed him to build an oratory on the rocky tidal island at the mouth of the Couesnon. 
 The 'Revelatio' relates that St. Aubert did not give heed to this vision at first and subsequently in irritation Michael appeared to him again, this time driving his finger into Aubert's skull, compelling him to carry out his instructions.  As the account is told, Michael is said to have appeared to him three times in total.  After this the oratory was built.  It was dedicated on October 16, 709, and Aubert is reputed to have been buried in it........ but we should assume that this was an apology for the Tumba epithet. 
 As the 'Revelatio' itself explains the Island was known locally as Tumba and if the author had known why, he would have embellished upon its sanctity, especially if he thought it was named so because it housed St. Aubert.  The relic of St. Aubert's skull, with a hole where the Archangel's finger apparently pierced it, can still be seen at the Saint-Gervais Basilica in Avranches.

It is more generally believed nowadays that the skull is in fact a prehistoric relic showing signs of trepanation or torture and the relic seems to be as improbable as the bones of King Arthur that were produced at Glastonbury.

The Revelatio as we have seen is based upon an earlier apparition of the Archangel Michael around 490 AD in Monte Gargano Italy, where a wealthy man named Gargan was pasturing his herd in the countryside when a bull fled from the herd to the mountain. When the same animal as portrayed in the 'Revelatio' was discovered sheltering in the mouth of a cave, an arrow was shot into the cave. Miraculously the arrows trajectory was reversed and it came back to wound Gargan. Baffled by such a mystery, he decided to consult the Bishop of the region who prescribed three days of fasting and prayers. After three days, the Archangel Michael appeared to the Bishop and declared that the cavern where the bull was found was now under his protection and that God had instructed the cave (which resembled the form of a church) be consecrated in his name and to the honour of all the Holy Angels in Heaven.

According to the Gargano legend, the Archangel Michael appeared several times to the Bishop of Sipontum near this cave where the bull was found, and he latterly apparently promised protection of the Beneventan’s and the people of Sipontum from Neapolitan pagan invaders. Due to Michael's dramatic later intercession, appearing with a flaming sword on the mountain, in the middle of a storm on the eve of the battle, those of Sipontum attributed their victory on May 8, 663 to Michael.  Thus for two appearances, Mont Gargano became firmly established in lore.
 So now  we have a shrine in Apulia in Italy to Michael the Archangel where the Archangel had also left his footprints. Water is also said to have seeped from the ceiling of the grotto, which healed all manner of maladies just as water sprouted at Mont-Saint-Michel according to the 'Revelatio' account, which also had curative properties. 
This feast which celebrated the Gargano apparition became part of the Roman Breviary which then spread throughout the Catholic Church.  It has been been formalized as ‘Apparitio S. Michaelis’ although it originally did not commemorate the apparition to the Bishop, but the victory of the Lombards over the Orthodox Greeks.
 For the scribe of the 'Revelatio' it does however offer a complete contrast to a Celtic inheritance for Mont-Saint-Michel;  a more Roman and therefore more credible affiliation to an already established Michaeline cult that is already revered in Europe.

 However Pope Gelasius I in 494 directed that a basilica be erected enclosing the grotto cave.  Eventually this Basilica became known as ‘Basilica di San Giovanni in Tumba’ because the Lombard king Rothari, who died in 652, was buried there. To be fair the Island of Mont-Saint-Michel which usurped by association its history from the Sanctuary of 'Monte Sant'Angelo sul Gargano', could also have thought it propitious, to be seen to possess a tomb epithet to complete its cloned provenance. 
 The date Mons Tumba was first used in conjunction with Mont-Saint-Michel is not known, so we cannot be certain if it has the echo or memories of the sacred tomb of the initial Celtic inhabitors, or if it was imitated from Monte Gargano, but this does seem a little strange when no tomb exists...... that no elucidation is capitalised upon in the Revelatio even by invention.
After the original monastery of 'Maudane' became known as Mons Tumba it would always have been beneficial to possess a tomb, to claim that a saintly figure rests within, to attract pilgrims. The 'Revelatio' makes ‘little hay’ from this scenario appearing rather to claim the name from the islands shape.  For this reason many commentators have assumed association with a previous Cairn or Tumulus that existed prior to any monastic or hermetical settlement.

 Another previous Michael appearance apart from Mont-Saint-Michel and Gargano is where the Archangel Michael is said to have drawn water from the rock at Colossae to create a curative spring much as he is reputed to have done in Roquetoire.  The Greeks claim that this apparition took place around 50 AD. There is also mention of an apparition of the Archangel Michael to Pope Gregory I in Rome where Saint Gregory the Great saw him in the air sheathing his sword. This appeared to signal the cessation of a plague and the appeasement of God’s wrath in 600 A.D. Gregory took the vision as an omen that the plague would stop, which it did, so he renamed the mausoleum the Castel Sant' Angelo.

 For this reason many commentators suggest that the re- emergence of the cult of St. Michael moved northward and westward after these apparitions and this premise is mainly based upon the northward journey of relics from Gargano to the French mount.
 The descriptive account in the Revelatio that tells of the visiting 'embassade' to Gargano to obtain relics and the miracles that transpired on the groups northward journey, does appear to impart the impression of this northern movement of the Michaeline cult .
 However the Monks sent by St. Aubert to Gargano to obtain relics can only be seen as an attempt to substantiate the French mounts own flimsy ‘apparatio’. On further investigation of the Edward charter granted to the monks of Mont-Saint-Michel...... we can link the Michael cult as having had its roots in Britain and possibly link this back to Melkin the source of all the French Grail literature. The square shield and short sword purportedly found in Ireland next to the body of a Dragon supposed to have been killed by Michael the Archangel mentioned in Dom. Beaunier’s ‘Recueil général des Evêches, Abbayes’ is supposedly another sacred relic from the Archangel revered on the French Mont, further establishing a proximity to him.

 The story in the 'Revelatio ecclesiae', imparts that St. Aubert patterned his "round crypt" after the archangel's renowned cave shrine at Monte Gargano in Apulia. He also sent the embassy of monks there to acquire angelic relics and it was on the Norman Mount he established 12 cannons (monks) to maintain the cult of Michael the Archangel. The Revelatio also relates that Aubert lived there with them. 
 Logically, a true apparition would hardly have needed further substantiation from another site but would have its own credible relics.  It seems that the French monks, not knowing the provenance of the mounts  names sake, set out to create its vicarious associations. 

 The unknown author of the Revelatio it would appear was a monk who formulated his text based on the 'Liber de apparitione in Monte Gargano', the hagiographical account of Michael's apparition there. This monkish scribe concocted a similar story of the Archangel’s appearance including similar instructions from the chief of the heavenly host...... to build a sanctuary for him. 
 The object of this endeavour from the author of the Revelatio' perspective was to adorn Mont-Saint-Michel with equal sanctity by establishing its own individualised account of spiritual precedence. Especially with the increasing diffusion of the veneration of St. Michael that appears to proliferate from the sixth century onwards.  The compilers of the 'Cartulary' and specifically the author of the 'Revelatio' are exposed in carrying out the same propagandist ploys that we saw earlier when dealing with the monks of Glastonbury....... all in the effort to attract pilgrims.

The sole purpose of enquiring into these events is to establish Mont-Saint-Michel’s association with the Archangel.  It is either based upon Melkin’s vision as intonated by Helinand, or it is based upon  the mount's  previous affiliation to a lost ecclesiastical body that existed across the English channel  prior to the French mounts inception.
 Given the Revelatio’s feeble attempt at establishing the original cause for the Islands name, this does not seem such an extraordinary assumption to make against established convention.

In the ninth century, the Revelatio account was put together..... not so much as a consolidated piece of hagiography, but rather as an apology establishing a person of local antiquity (Aubert) as the star of the drama.  It also at the same time substantiates for posterity (and for its own devotional future purposes), a bona fide supernatural derivation. 
 The story of its founder became a consolidated body of hagiography around 1200AD however, rounding off events set far enough back in history that they could not be verified.  The author set about constructing an account that squarely put its founder with connections to Avranche, but lacking any substance on which to base a celestial apparition..... he chose on oddly familiar account based upon events that are nearly a duplicate of those having transpired in Gargano.
 The whole of this early document seems to be in effect a concocted excuse for not knowing the mounts origins and why the earliest inhabitants of the island affiliated the island with the Archangel Michael.

 Most Scholars today assume the specific purpose of the abbey community in creating the cartulary was to defend its right to elect its own abbot as this was a contested issue as Ducal houses vied for influence over the monastery in the 11 hundreds . This in part may be true, but by this time the 'Revelatio' had established the link to the Archangel through St. Aubert, a substantiated and venerated local Bishop of Avranches.
It most certainly would have dissuaded mundane attempts to take control over the mount, if it could be shown that the chief of the heavenly host himself had instigated the islands spiritual inception. The question is: why was it necessary to fabricate this link to the Archangel by sending the 'Embassade' and imitating the account of Gargano.... unless the monks were specifically having to substantiate a previously unknown source for the nomenclature of the Island?
They could have named the Island after any saint if it were that simple, but the Monks in the ninth century living on an Island named after the Archangel had to find links to him and the only known source of obtaining credibility was in Gargano.

This 'Revelatio' (a construct or compilation of the middle ninth century) attempts to cover or give reason for the islands association with St. Michael by almost creating a cult around St. Aubert as being the original founder. So, due to a lack of historical background to cover the time between its initial founders(celtic) settling and dedicating the Island to St. Michael...... a contrived and mirrored story was compiled based upon the similar events that recount the founding of Mont Gargano. 
 It would appear that through this attempt at rationalising how the island obtained its Michaeline attachment....... we can deduce that the Mont at an early date, (possibly due to Melkin’s emigration), had an association with Michael the Archangel.  It is this proposition that the initial settlement was due to its insular similarity to Burgh Island that we should try to connect the two, but any obvious trace of that connection was lost long ago. All that can be seen now are the shadows of this connection.
The Mont needed to invent for itself a credible provenance based upon the now well established shrine of Gargano but was there indeed some truth in the account of the embassade sent to Gargano. In fact the earliest graffiti carved on the walls of the grotto chapel in Monte Gargano is an Anglo Saxon name of Leofwini and could have been one of the embassade. Even with these tentative associations with the Mediterranean, Francophone scholars often have discerned a Celtic imprint on the Mont rather than a Roman or eastern Euoropean influence.  This being largely attested to by the replacement of the original monastic hermits by 30 Benedictines in 966 ‘à cause de leur dérèglement’. 

 This Benedictine community replaced the group of Canons supposedly instituted by St. Aubert.  The Introductio monachorum, written around 1058 condemned these unspecified 'offences' of the Canons as justification for their replacement. This transition was most probably caused due to a power shift in that the Mont- Saint-Michel’s initial roots were Bretton. The changeover could of course be of a theological nature in that certain Celtic practices did not conform to the Roman view or even more sinister, certain beliefs held at the mount had been commuted from another Island.

This original Bretton or Celtic order may indeed have had different views if the Melkin connection could be established ....in that, Mont-Saint-Michel was founded by one better informed from the other insular Celtic order of St. Michael in Devon. It is this supposition that I am hoping to persuade readers to adopt.

   The Benedictines, as can be seen in many cases, had a way of slandering any establishment they wished to usurp.  It is our assumption here that when the Benedictines arrived and took over from an unknown sect that had occupied Mont-Saint-Michel since the time of Pair and Scubilion, some sort of document was found that gave evidence of a very sacred island in Britain.  This document could have claimed some right over the Island by the French Mont or have proffered some previous dispensation toward it.  In whatever form this evidence came to light, the new order of Benedictines was keen to get its hand on an Island in Britain. 
 It is also our assumption that through an early association with this British island which 'coveted' a sacred tomb...... the French mount recieved its 'Mons Tumba' appellation.  It was founded or later inhabited by a British hermit called Melkin who is attested to have experienced an angelic apparition.  As we are apprised already....... he certainly had knowledge of the tomb on Avalon. It is this evidence of a renowned tomb existing in Britain that drove the Benedictine community to procure from Edward the Confessor the handing over of this  British island into their possession.

A charter exists that purports to give them possession, which may indeed, have been based upon previous documentation that had been unearthed when the Celtic monks were removed in 966 AD.

What are known today to be the remnants of an early oratory on the French island, recognised by a wall of roughly shaped stones of granite mortared onto the rock so as to cover over a natural outcrop of the island...... was found behind the masonry of the southernmost of the double apses of the church of Notre-Dame-sous-Terre. This is said to be  an eighth or ninth-century building that was closed off to visitors after a fire in 1776. It may however be from an earlier date if we refer back to 'Maudane' and the Celtic inhabitants.  Who built this and where the founders came from can never be satisfactorily answered, but the account of the moving of rocks on the summit of Mont-Saint-Michel given by the 'Revelatio', seems improbable if previous buildings were already established. 
 With all the construction that has occurred at the Island, any prior evidence of an early hermitage has now been built upon. A new façade for the nave of the more recent Roman church and a terrace toward the west, built in the twelfth century, had covered over the eighth century building by providing structural support that closed off the earlier monastic buildings until rediscovered in 1961.

 Did the Island of Mont-Saint-Michel derive its namesake from a distant memory of an account of the installation of an Angelic cult on the island? Did in fact Melkin receive his vision of the Grail here and the memory of that incident has become lost?
This possibly concurs with the account given by Helinand of a Holy Angel appearing to a hermit that we encountered earlier in the enquiry. ‘At this time a certain marvellous vision was revealed by an angel to a certain hermit in Britain concerning St. Joseph the decurion who deposed from the cross the body of our Lord, as well as concerning the paten or dish in which our Lord supped with his disciples, whereof the history was written out by the said hermit and is called ‘Of The Graal’.

 The chances that this apparition did occur to Melkin in France at the date of 707AD, is too much of a coincidence to be  just one year younger than St. Aubert’s supposed vision of an Angel in the fabricated story of the 'Revelatio'. Especially when we have concluded that if a real vision had happened to St. Aubert from the Archangel, there would not be a need to substantiate the St. Michael connection by sending an 'embassade' to Gorgano.  The account given above and dated as having taken place in 707AD, (given the Michaeline connection to the same Island in Britain), while understanding that the Michael appellation is more probably Celtic in origin......... certainly adds flavour to the Melkin connection.

 This event of the apparition of an Angel to either a British Hermit possibly, or as stated a ‘Hermit in Britain’ on the very subject matter that we know Melkin is the most informed upon, could indicate a link.  If we take into account the Biblical connections of the Grail matter and the coincidental date of St. Aubert's vision which we know to be spurious...... it supports the position that Mont-Saint-Michel received its appellation due to Melkin’s vision, not St. Auberts.
The first part of what Helinand records above is as we have covered already from an older source.  This source through Helinand's  chronological account is ascribed the date of 707AD  and this date was understood by where it was inserted in his chronology.

 This passage is quoted by Vincent of Beauvais (Speculum Historiaie, 1200s) and John of Tynemouth (Historia Aurea).   Helinand was a contemporary of the early romancers  and because of this many commentators have thought that Helinand had taken this account as having been stated or invented by Walter Map. As we covered earlier there is confusion of the date given by Map as 717, as it  differs from the date given by Helinand.  Map, writing just before Helinand has heard of the Graal account of the British hermit from the same source that supplied Helinand ...... both of them understand the Graal as a container as it contains the blood of Jesus. 
 The second part of Helinand's account ‘Now a platter, broad and somewhat deep is called in French ‘gradalis’ or ‘gradale’, is given by Helinand himself to explain his conception of a paten or dish in which our Lord supped with his disciples. These are Helinand's own words and take on the composition of the Graal. This part of Helinands account describing the nature of the Graal did not come from the source that supplied the apparition account about a British Hermit.  

 This would seem to be Helinand’s own interpretation of the Graal as it was currently perceived. The whole record of this account however does evidence that a book about the Graal emanating from a British Hermit, recorded by Helinand, given in the quotes from Vincent of Beauvais and John of Tynemouth........ was accounted for by an Angelic apparition. If this apparition recorded in 707 AD, a year before St. Aubert had his supposed vision, has been transposed upon St.Aubert and it is upon this apparition of the Archangel Michael the Revelatio gives as the reason for the naming of Mont- Saint-Michel........ then is it not possible that one apparition has been transposed, when it actually occurred to the other.

   What we can conclude from all this is not substantiable but, it is an amazing coincidence that a British monk who we know to have written a book on the Grail is testified by an early source to have had an apparition in 707AD. The substance of the Grail book is said to have come from an angelic apparition and that this book then ends up in France.  The book of the Grail ends up there with a date a year before another supposed Angelic apparition occured to St. Aubert. The coincidence is further extended if we consider that this French Island island is called Mons Tumba on which we think a British monk had an apparition. it is also an insular Island like that from which he had just come from and where he had just witnessed a tomb.
  If the Mons Tumba was known by this name, where is the tomb on the French mount and who is in it?  Why is it not named after the person in it rather that just known as the ‘tomb mount’. The writer of the 'Revelatio' lumps this apparition on St. Aubert to establish a local link to St. Michael while proffering as explanation the shape of the island to explain the island’s other name, which is derived from a legend of an unknown tomb. All very tentative I hear the sceptic say.....but wait until you see the charter!!!

In the cold light of Day the 'Revelatio' is  just an account that was conferred on and applied to St. Aubert being the oldest ecclesiastical authority to which the account might be attached....... given his Avranchian background: 'Now in truth we may tell how the Prince of the blessed spirits dedicated this place by angelic revelation'.

If this seems too improbable at the moment at least, we have an account of an Apparition of an Angel occurring at the same era as Helinand states and about a subject (the Graal) of which we know Melkin to be associated and in the Country from which the substance of his Grail book was to emanate.  Add to this the explicit nature of the Revelatio’s insistent connection to Avranches to confer on itself that affiliation in opposition to a Bretton or British provenance....... and the fact that Melkin would most certainly have had that affinity, we can see that the Mount may well have been a Bretton establishment. Otherwise where is the history and why the necessity to invent one.

 

Merovingian rule was ended March 752 when Pope Zachary formally deposed Childeric III. Zachary's successor, Pope Stephen II, confirmed and crowned Pepin III in Childeric's place in 754 beginning the Carolingian monarchy and a start to the shaping of new associations and relations that must have affected Mont- Saint-Michel.

Archaeologists have long tried to assert that the insular or Island cult of St. Michael had replaced earlier worship of the Greek and Latin system of Deities, but the establishment of Mont-Saint-Michel has little to do with Columba's withdrawn hideaway on the island of Iona or the events in Mont Gargano.  Least of all, Sol Invictus or Gallic cults of Mercury, Jupiter, and Mithras. As we have argued here it  is more likely a result of a direct British influence based upon the tomb site within the Island of Burgh Island.
The myth of an Island containing a tomb could have proliferated and brought on the isolated rocky high retreats that are commonly associated with shrines to St. Michael today. The knowledge of which has been perpetuated by imitation of similar sites being occupied, the obvious example being the community that inhabited beehive huts built by Irish monks on 'Skellig Michael' as we saw earlier in the geometric ley line association between Mont-Saint-Michel and St. Michael’s mount.
 Signs of the  insular cult of remote shrines was not seen before the sixth century in northern Europe and may indeed have emanated after Melkin had left Burgh Island.

 We really cannot rely on the dates nor the historical accuracy of the 'Revelatio' and it gives no specific date for the episcopacy of St. Aubert; it associates him with the reign of a King Childebert, but a twelfth-century montoise chronicle, dates his foundation of the Mont to the year 708 with a dedication in 709  and this ties in with the reign of Childebert III (694-711).

However, to get back to the point, in the year 966 Richard I, Duke of Normandy drove these original 'canons' variously described as clercs, hermites or monks, from Mont-Saint-Michel........ probably because of their different Celtic creed and replaced them with 30 Benedictine monks which had been chosen from different monasteries in Normandy and installed Mainard the Flemish reformer as the head Abbot.

  We are told in Dom. Beaunier’s  ‘Recueil chronologique des Archevêches, Abbayes, et Prieurez de France’ that the kings of France and England and the dukes of Bretagne and Normandie, all visited the Mont and in the intervening years before the Norman conquest the monastery became rich under Benedictine rule.  Richard II rebuilt and added buildings covering the original structure.  Also in a surviving charter it is stated that in February  966 Lothar king of the western Franks, at the request of Pope John XIII, confirmed Hugh II as the archbishop of Rouen, who approved the Benedictine establishment at Mont-Saint-Michel by Duke Richard I of Normandy.
 The Mont, with its Benedictine associations and contrived history became celebrated throughout Europe and the pilgrims of Europe flocked to it.  Eventually, the Mont was granted to the order of the Chevaliers de St. Michel by Louis XI.

The 'cartulary' relates that ‘The Leos and Gregories of the tenth and eleventh centuries leaned on us in their great struggle for reform.  Our Duke Richard-Sans-Peur, in 966, evicted the original ecclesiastical monks from the Mount in order to bring here the highest influence of the time, the Benedictine monks of Monte Cassino. Richard II, grandfather of William the Conqueror, began this Abbey Church in 1020, and helped Abbot Hildebert to build it. When William the Conqueror in 1066 set out to conquer England, Pope Alexander II stood behind him and blessed his banner.’

 Much of the struggle in the ensuing years was due to the insistence of outside forces influencing who was to be the elected Abbot of the Mont by the ducal houses, so that they might influence the increasing power and prestige of the island by installing a sympathetic Abbot to the ever changing political landscape. The monks themselves can be seen, evidenced by the various charters recorded in the cartulary, to be engaged in a battle to be able to choose their own abbot according to the rules set out by St. Benedict, but for a long period were imposed upon by the ducal houses’ infighting. 
 Abbot Geoffrey eventually obtained a papal bull from Eugenius III in 1150 confirming the abbey's possessions while extending to it the protection of St. Peter, and confirming the Benedictine code of free election of its abbots.  Soon after this, Abbot Geoffrey died. The monks took a year before electing their own choice of Richard de La Mouche, a relation of the Bishop of Avranches, which annoyed Henry of Normandy who had put up his own Abbot instead. Eugenius III, in a writ of 7 July 1152, maintained that Abbot Richard be restored. In 1153 both abbots and the Bishop were summoned to Rome and Henry (who was now married to Eleanor of Aquitaine) because of this fight for control........ was threatened with excommunication and interdict by the Pope. Robert of Torigny in the end was elected abbot as a compromise choice between the monks and Henry.
 What was it that was so important that Henry would risk excommunication for? Did he, by this time, believe that the Monks of Mont-Saint-Michel were the possessors of the tomb and Avalon because  at this time they now controlled St. Michael’s mount in Cornwall. We should not forget that it was Henry who regarding the search for Arthur had supposedly ‘disclosed to the monks some evidence from his own books of where the body was to be found  and some from letters inscribed on the pyramids’.  Was it that Henry was not really in search for Arthur but for the Tomb of Joseph and after he had died (as we covered earlier), the Glastonbury Monks associated his search with their uncovering of Arthur...... his name lending authority and credibility to the find. Certainly he had the wife who was well versed in all the Grail material, but It seems probable to me that he thought that the Monks of Mont-Saint-Michel had claimed the 'Island in the west' (where Joseph was reputed to be buried) known to him and his wife as Avallon.

 The later parts of the cartulary portraying evidence of these charters, was compiled in the twelfth century and one can see how they are changed and interpolated to suit the times giving credibility to their possessions and grants from ducal and royal houses....... and as time passed, some charters were appended for their own purposes.

 However when we study some of the records regarding a religious British order called ‘St. Michael by the sea’ and try to reconcile these with records in the Doomsday book, it would appear there has been confusion between (or certainly an association between) the Island where Joseph, Jesus and Arthur were entombedi.e Burgh island-Avalon,  the Island of Mont-Saint-Michel and St. Michael’s Mount in Cornwall.

 What seems to have transpired is that a small hermitage or order known as 'St. Michael by the sea', once existed upon Burgh Island of which there is no archaeological visible evidence, ( but nor is there evidence of the chapel built by the Templars). This Order appears to have been termed ‘St.Michael next the sea’ and is probably the same mysterious order referred to by the Welsh annals as 'Consecratio Michaelis archangeli ecclesiae'.

If we assume that after Melkin had travelled to France, he settled at an insular hermitage, which was then subsequently dedicated to the Archangel Michael.  Mont-Saint-Michel's nomenclature of 'Mons Tumba' lingered over from a distant reverberation of a tomb from the British side; then conveniently, we can conclude both designations of name are largely the result of Melkin’s presence and we should see what else ties in with this scenario.

This at least would offer a better scenario than that set forth by the Revelatio in the naming of Mont-Saint-Michel as Mons Tumba  and may offer some explanation of the smaller Island on the tidal sand flats being named Tombelaine due to its celtic links. About the smaller island next to Mont-saint-Michel....... ‘It emerges to the heights from the sands of the shore, it rises upward two hundred cubits in the manner of a burial mound’, ........is the explanation supplied. The small island is described by ‘Helen’ or ‘Elaine’  supposed to be buried there but no person is ever described as having a tomb on the main Island.

 The history of Mont-Saint-Michel related in the Revelatio pretends to relate to the eighth century (although it was compiled much later), but in the intervening years the memory of any historical link with a Celtic past has now been lost. The position we are advocating is that the heritages of both Mont-Saint-Michel and a community known as ‘St Michael by the sea’ were distanced for some unknown reason,while the religious order on Burgh Island in the interim was disbanded and the two islands historical connection was lost over time.

 However we can see that records referring to a British order of St. Michael existed long before there was any evidence of any religious or monastic activity at St. Michaels Mount in Cornwall.  It would seem that the history of the Cornish mount has undeniably usurped or been confused with that of Mont-Saint-Michel, because of its lack of prior historical background......... as is well attested through the account of William of Worcester, written in the fourteen hundreds.

 The Revelatio ecclesiae sancti Michaelis was concocted and the history of its founding was conferred on the work of St. Aubert, as no distinctive hagiography could be produced for the site...... but the Revelatio actually confirms the knowledge of prior settlement: 'Thus monks long have lived here and still now there stand two churches built by the hands of the first inhabitants'.

When one looks at it objectively the 'Revelatio' could appear to be a hagiographic work by the Bishop of Avranche with the sole purpose of firming up the Mount as part of his diocese and confirming his authority as Abbott over it.  However if our assumptions are correct, it was the concoction of a later scribe rather than St. Aubert himself.
  St. Aubert while been portrayed as the founder of the sanctuary is mentioned in context with another person known as Bain and his sons in the 'Revelatio'. Bain also had a vision and went to labour in the construction of the initial building as we are informed. Since the Revelatio and its story of the founding of the first church is obviously not a true account of the founding of the Island........ it should be considered in part as a tool to give credible explanation for the St.Michael appellation. It may also be comprised of incidental anecdotes about characters such as Bain that played a part in the Islands roots. 
  The mention of Childebert has led many to date the 'Revelatio',  but there were three Kings of this name and it is still uncertain given the fabricated nature, if the reference to the king has a shade of historical memory and can be directly linked to the time of Aubert.
 The first Childebert is from 511 to 558 the second from 575 596 and the third 695 to 711. Childebert III conveniently fits the founding date by Aubert.

The oldest copy of the cartulary document was bombed in 1944 but it had been well studied by scholars and if there were any additional information concerning the period prior to the Revelatio it would have come to light.  Modern scholarship however has determined by examination of the literary culture of the time, that the Revelatio was written a little after the middle of the ninth century as the script type matches those from the reign of  Emperor Louis the Pious 814 to 840.
The absence of all other sources that can historically date the foundation of the Mount has meant that most commentators have relied upon what the Revelatio reveals, as a near accurate account of the islands foundation. However certain events such as the sending of envoys to Gargano, if de-constructed from the historical context to which they pretend to pertain, show us that the embassade of monks might indeed have made their journey to Gargano at a much later date than that expressed in the 'Revelatio. 

 One has to ask, why if the Archangel had appeared in the way that the Revelatio sets out, would a group of Monks walk all the way to Gargano to come back with a few shoddy relics of a piece of alter cloth and marble pertaining to be part of the Archangel’s footprint. Could it be that there was absolutely nothing to proffer in explanation for the St. Michael epithet circa 820AD when the monk at the mount wrote the Revelatio. Afterall as we have covered he was trying to substantiate the islands connection with the Archangel.
 A more likelyscenario is that a group of Anglo-Saxon monks went to Gargano from Mont-St-Michel around the time the Revelatio was written and on their return ‘Hey-Presto’ a monastery already existed as the account recounts in the 'Revelatio'

‘Thus, after only a short time, with God promoting the work forward and the structure built, Aubert remained disquieted since he lacked relics of the holy Archangel. Blessed Michael advised the Bishop how he should very quickly send monks all the way to Monte Gargano, where the festival of the most holy archangel was observed reverently. They should bring back that blessing which is of the patronage of the Archangel, that Aubert might receive it with the greatest thanksgiving’.

 Followed by ‘Meanwhile after many days on the road the great messengers returned on the very day on which the construction was completed on Monte Tumba. They entered into what seemed a new world, for when they had departed the spot was filled with a thicket of briars.’

The author of the Revelatio sub-consciously admits firstly, that the structure was built before the Monks were sent and then latterly weaves in that miraculously it was ready and complete to house the relics on the very day of their return.

 A total of five English names are found at Gargano that date to the same time (circa 820) as when the monk thought fit to create the Revelatio account. 'Wigfus', 'Hereberecht', 'Herraed' and the 'Leofwini' we mentioned earlier are inscribed in runes in the grotto and are most probably dated to around 800-850. This date is confirmed by similar Anglo-Saxon runes at Rome of the same period. ‘Eadrhidsaxo’ the fifth name, is carved in Roman alphabet on a different wall, and is still Anglo-Saxon, but probably the graffiti is from a separate pilgrimage. Was this embassade of Celtic monks that were responsible for the collection of the relics, dispatched solely to establish their monastery with credible Michaeline Status?  If the journey and the Revelatio account are concurrent, was this recently accomplished trip weaved into a concocted story centred on Aubert to explain Melkin’s Apparition a hundred years beforehand?

 If we assume the Melkin connection, the two names of the French mount existed for only two reasons and both of these originating through the British link at least a hundred to two hundred years before the earliest date for the writing of the Revelatio. The two reasons posited here for the name of the mount, is either its connection with the old British tomb with its own Michaeline affiliation, or the fact that what Helinand’s source relates, did transpire...... and Melkin saw an apparition of the Archangel and duly wrote the book of the Grail.

 One can be sure that if a tomb had existed at the French site much mileage would have been made of this fact by the monks from an early date....... as the island from its first reference was known as Mons Tumba only later becoming ‘Mont-Saint-Michel in periculo maris’.
 Some commentators have posited the idea that the 'Revelatio' has the story of 'Bain' and his sons removing big rocks ready for the foundation of the first ecclesiastical building as referring to the removal of a Megalithic site. This would of course explain the site of an older tomb, but in no way give adequate explanation of the need to validate the archangel’s name with the site, by sending an embassade to Mont Gargano. This should be viewed in terms of what the 'Revelatio' relates...... that upon their return and after several miracles in the interim, Mont-Saint-Michel has suddenly been finished on the day they return and the conveyance of relics has now established the Mount as a bonifide Michael Shrine. St. Aubert only then dedicates the building and installs a collegiate of 12 monks followed by a miraculous discovery of water at the top of Mount.

The first mention of a pilgrimage to Mont-saint-Michel is found in the ‘vita frodoberti’ which tells of a certain Ratbert from Melon who made a pilgrimage to the Mount in 868, but there is no mention of it in other literature as being a Michael shrine prior to the ninth century.

Sometime after 966, it would appear that a relationship regarding the connection between the British Island and the Norman Mont was unearthed by documentation that somehow established this connection.
It is this supposition that at an earlier time some Papal dispensation, Charter or substantiation of an earlier link had been recognised regarding these two mounts connection and that the Norman mount had in some way 'rights' over the British island known as 'St. Michael by the sea'. It is this which appears to be the basis for the formulation of a charter granted by Edward the Confessor which tries to re-establish rights over an area including what can only be an Island called ‘St.Michael by the Sea’.

  The reason for assuming this is that, if one were going to forge a charter based upon older records it would definitely give credibility to that claim if, (no matter how ancient this connection might be) one could produce an established precedent upon which to reiterate and base an updated charter.   It would be pointless producing an authoritative charter that did not concur with the dispensation that was granted, if indeed place names of locations were included on an older document. Even if these place names were now non- existent and the authority upon which the older document was based is now not verifiable. It seems unlikely that the Norman Monks would randomly covet a British Island and take steps to promote a charter giving them possession over it, unless it was worthy of being coveted.

 If one were to fabricate a charter while being ignorant of the specific location, then this would certainly cause confusion when staking the claim. This does not seem to be the case with Edward’s charter in that it was not a fabrication........ but plainly those who constructed it were ignorant of the location and environ to which it pertained. 
  If one were reiterating a claim based upon an older document one would use the names of the locations referred to in the initial deed.  The fact that these locations had become disassociated or disused and their current names may have changed during a period of several hundred years ....it would be hard to represtent in a document that it alluded to a specific location. It would be even more difficult if one ignorant of these facts, especially if these lands witnessed in the older document existed across the channel.

 However if a future King of England were merely updating an already established right to lands by lending his name as a future authority..... then the outmoded names of the locations in the present charter being constructed would merely be transcribed from the older document..... to the newest edition, but the ‘right’ would be established by a the future kings authority.

 The reader may think this sounds trribly convoluted and contrived but it is what appears to have transpired. These circumstances certainly are applicable to a monastic organisation that had recently been installed on a Norman Mont replacing a previously Celtic order that left behind old documentation. If the recently installed Benedictines had discovered some 'right' over lands in Britain that included an Island 'next to the sea' referred to by the Archangel’s name and possibly rumoured to possess an unknown sanctity, then all efforts would be made to re-procure these lands.
 The possibility of regaining these lands became all the more pressing with the chance of being able to pull off such a coup, when one considers a pending invasion by ones fellow countrymen. The best way of re-establishing ones rights in the ensuing mayhem after an invasion is to have documentary evidence from the highest authority in the land. It would be fortuitous to have it look as if it were always part of ones overseas possessions with a recent charter confirming that from a British king.

This Charter granted by Edward is entered in the cartulary of Mont-Saint-Michel and is probably dated to around 1030.  It could be dated to the reign of   Robert the Magnificent who signs it along with Edward. It is possible that they were staying at Mont-Saint-Michel after his aborted mission to invade England on Hardicanutes behalf.  According to the Norman chronicler William of Jumièges , Robert I, Duke of Normandy attempted an invasion of England to place Edward on the throne in about 1034  and the conclusion of the abortive attempt ended at the Norman Mont after his ships had blown off course toward Jersey. 

 It is impossible to verify who’s signature is genuine or if the whole were faked or if it were genuinely signed by all the undersigned........ but we can speculate that the charter is genuine and based upon an original document in an attempt  to regain a hold on lands that the Celtic predecessors had owned.  The only problem was that in error, St.Michael’s mount in Cornwall was mistaken for the intended prize of Burgh Island after the eventual invasion.
The Monks of Mont-Saint-Michel having based their charter on an old document had no idea of the island’s surroundings having never seen it, but based their charter on the names that were given in old documents from their Celtic forebears.

Edward the Confessor's Charter taken from Oliver's Monasticon which is the same as from the cartulary does not mention Cornwall.

In nomine sanctae et individuae Trinitatis, ego Edwardus Dei gratia Anglorum rex, dare volens pretium redemptionis animae meae, vel parentum meorum, sub consensu et testimonio bonorum virorum, tradidi saneto Michaeli archangelo in usum fratrum Deo servientium in eodem loeo sanctum Michaelem qui est juxta mare, cum omnibus appendenciis, villis scilicet, castellis, agris et caeteris attinentibus. Addidi etiam totam terram de Vennefire, cum oppidis, villis, agris, pratis, terris cultis et incultis, et cum horum redditibus. Adjunxi quoque datis portum addere qui vocatur Ruminella cum omnibus quae ad cum pertinent, the leo et cum omni territorio illius culto et inculto, et eorum redditibus.

Si quis autem his donis conatus fuerit ponere calumpniam anathema factus, iram Dei incurrat perpetuam. Utque nostrae donationis auctoritas verius firmiusque teneatur in posterum, manu mea firmando subterscripsi, quod et plures fecere testium.

Signum regis Edwardi II,  Signum Roberti archiepiscopi Rothomagensis  Hereberti episcopi Lexoviensis. Roberti episcopi Constantiensis. Signum Radulphi  Signum Vinfrcdi  Nigelli vicecomitis Anschitilli. Chosehet. Turstini.

'In the name of the holy and undivided trinity, I Edward, by the grace of God king of the English, wishing to make some offering for the salvation of my soul or the souls of my forebears, have with the consent and witness of good men, given Saint Michel the Archangel, for the use of the brethren serving God in that place, St Michael which is next the sea, with all that pertains to it, that is to say mills, fortifications  (castellis), fields and other things belonging thereunto. I have added also all the land of Vennesire with towns (oppidis), mills fields, meadows and uncultivated lands, and with the revenues of these. I have further added to these grants the port which is called Ruminella with all things which pertain to it, that is to say mills fisheries (fishery mills) and all land cultivated and uncultivated and the revenues thereof. If, anyone shall endeavour to interpose subtle impediments against these grants, he shall incur by anathema, the perpetual wrath of god. And in order that the authority of our gift shall be held more truly and enduringly in future times, I have written beneath with my hand in confirmation and many have made their witness'.

 This charter in the cartulary has, Edward’s signature, count Robert of Normandy, the signature of Rabel, commander of Duke Roberts Fleet, Robert archbishop of Rouen, Herbert bishop of Lisieux, Robert bishop of Coutances, a Humphrey Nigel the Viscomte Anshitell, Ralph Choscet Turstin.

 The threat of Anathema to anyone who contests this charter is quite poignant; by intonating that they expect the land to which they are laying claim, to be contested at some future date. Many medieval charters have caveats, but few as forceful as this, as Anathema is synonymous with excommunication. If a Norman monk waved this charter in the face of a recently conquered Cornish monk at St. Michael’s Mount, there would obviously be full co-operation..... especially since it was an English king that granted the foreigners their island.
This position is one of many scenarios as we cannot know if the Cornish St. Michael’s mount already had the Michaeline appellation before the charter. This is a possibility if the order on Burgh Island had been forced to disband and settled on a similar Island further south in Cornwall.

What we do know from Domesday is that a person called Brismarus was appealed to as having lands pertaining to the Cornish mount before the Norman Conquest. This does not however indicate that St. Michael’s Mount had that name but may indeed have received its name because of the Charter in the twenty years before Domesday. It is feasible to posit  that the Edward charter applied to Burgh island as it was once known as St. Michael by the sea.

One would expect that the charter indicates that these 'gifts' denoted in the charter are in a relative location possibly presumed as within the lands of 'Venneshire'. We can assume that if the port of Ruminella were some two hundred miles away in another county, the document might leave some clarification and distinction of location toward this gift. If we can safely assume that the gift relates to one specific area, where is this port of Ruminella that we assume is in close proximity to St. Michael close by the sea? 
  The Latin Fluminea or Flumens  giving river  may have been a misconstrued description that gave rise to the appelation of Ruminella. The Capital ‘r’ in some medieval scroll handwritten parchment may have been mis-scribed for the ‘FL’ (capital 'F' interlinked with a lowercase 'l' to give rhe 'R' for Ruminella. We can contrive such a scenario for a diminutive understanding from FLUMINEA, and as we know the Latin suffix ‘Ella’ would give the diminutive small or 'little river'. This may indeed be the explanation of the port next to ‘St. Michael by the sea’ being described as a little river and being misunderstood to be the name of a port. The port would of course be Bantham.
 If the Charter was merely transferring mills, towns, fisheries, castles, and a port, which had at one time been the possession of a Celtic establishment, (appealed to as having been already being under the custodianship of one Brismarus as a representative of St Michael’s in Cornwall), where are all these possessions at the time of Domesday? Why are none of these substantial assets that have been granted to the alien priory, not mentioned in Domesday?  Is it because the Benedictine monks only took over what did pertain to Brimarus at the time of the Conquest instead of a larger area that pertained to Burgh Island (as St. Michael by the sea) i.e as we saw in the Perlesvaus; that area containing castles and the river valleys running south from Dartmoor?

Thomas Tanner in his Notitia Monastica makes the note when referring to the Cornish mount saying ‘the priory of Benedictine monks placed here by king Edward the Confessor before 1085, annexed to the abbey of St. Michael in Periculo Maris in Normandy, by Robert Earl of Merton and Cornwall’; makes a specific note that John Speed in his ‘Historie of Great Britaine’, who wrote in 1611 prior to him,  mentions the monasteries of St. Michael de Monte and St. Michael de Magno Monte, as distinct religious houses in Britain. It is uncertain from where John Speed obtained this opinion or from which era it might have come.

  It is a possibility that at one time circa 900AD both Islands on the South west peninsula had taken Michael as namesake. St. Michael’s rock, the previous name of Burgh island, the very place which the Templars went to great lengths to sustain ‘in memoriam’...... may well have lost any affiliation with the importance of the tomb which the island contains, at the time of the conquest. 

 Burgh island, referred to as Avalon by the Grail writers  long before the Templars were responsible for tracing over an initial ley system by marking out the St. Michael design....... was known as 'St. Michael's rock'.  This charter refers to it as otherwise known as 'St. Michael by the sea'. Given the fisheries, castles and port mentioned.......it does appear to be  the Island that was being implicated in the charter. The only problem was that the French monks laid claim to the wrong island.
  Speed may well be referring to the era after the Templars when certainly both islands had the Michaeline appellation until Burgh island lost its chapel.....even after Camden had recorded it standing where the ‘Avons waters are mixed’.

 A case of mistaken location can certainly be posited if we suppose that the Monks of Mont-Saint-Michel did not know that at the time the charter was written there was nothing on either St. Michael’s Mount in Cornwall or Burgh Island. They may well have chosen St. Michael’s mount by mistake because it at least had a Hermitage on it, evidenced by the person of Brismarus.  The Cornish St. Michael’s mount had not received its apparition which subsequently was to be contrived by the Benedictine monks from Mont-Saint-Michel, who also ascribed much of their erroneous history to the Cornish mount.  As as we have covered, we cannot discover when it received its 'Michael' dedication. By contrast however we should understand that Michael’s association with the tomb had been established since the time of Melkin.

 The un-informed monks were essentially trying to secure a British island of that name which they had learnt contained a sacred tomb and they identified the location with an Island; hence ‘St. Michael next the sea’ as in the Charter.  After all, this could be the reason for their own rumoured connection to a tomb. This assumption of a mixed up land claim based upon a reconstituted charter, founded on old documentation could of course be inaccurate but when we consider later challenges and squabbles over land surrounding the Cornish mount and the Earl of Mortain, this becomes more probable.

So here we have a charter stipulating what one can only assume is a religious house called St. Michael by the sea granted to the Norman island with all appurtenances. If we assume the actual charter referred to an Island and that island had originally a religious order of St. Michael on it, this scenario becomes more tenable, since the most famed person of the modern world is buried within. This proposition clearer when we consider that this island had a natural port next to it with a large fishing industry, but it is unclear how this was mixed up with a similar insular location in Cornwall except that Burgh island at the time had become anonymous and barren.

Venneshire could indeed be an alternative for Devonshire and there was nothing resembling a natural port in Mounts bay. The Island of St. Michael by the sea however not only had a natural port next to it, but was engaged in fisheries on account of the huge schoals of Pilchards that were found in the bay. Although Venn is still a hamlet at the top of the Avon river it would seem that the transcription of ‘venefire’ might have been an overtly grandiose claim. Shires came into being around the time of the Norman Conquest when this document was written so it would seem that the initial document related to a place called Venn and the added shire may have been aspirational as to the size of the area. Even though Venn is the only area by this name in Britain, just three miles up river from Burgh Island next to Aveton Gifford, the descriptive term from which it derives its nomenclature could not be more indicative of the steep ‘vales’ caused by the rivers we have named in our investigation of Tin. In fact the old tin track that runs down from Shipley Bridge arrives at the small bridge right opposite Venn. This is the same track that the ‘Linch pin’ was found on and leads down to the Bridge opposite Venn. Those not going to Ictis along the tidal road would have used this bridge to cross the Avon.  The Aveton Gifford Bridge further downstream shown in the Leonardo painting was only completed in 1440 and Domesday records Aveton having just 17 villagers and 8 slaves.   If this is the Venn referred to in the charter it is possible that it was once a larger community in Saxon days before the Conquest, the evidence of which may have been wiped away if it were situated on the flood plain as we saw with Bangor in our initial enquiry.

Certainly the known fishing ground near Ruminella, (if Bantham was then described as a port of that name), was industrial enough to afford mills; the ruins of which are evidenced along the river. The pilchard fleets seen right up to the turn of the 20th century at Bantham and Bigbury Bay evidence the large tonnage of fish caught. These shoals of pilchard attested to as far back as Pytheas by his nomenclature of the Island of Ictis,  if we are correct that its derivative from Greek ‘Ichthus’  is ‘fish Island’. (the Fisher king buried in Ictis).

 It is known as we have previously covered that a large Roman community was established at Bantham Ham just after the closure of Ictis and the name due to their presence could have been derived from ‘Romanella’ in the time that Melkin left for France, but it seems more likely the result of a scribal error referring to the port being part of a little river(Flumen) is the most obvious as all the surrounding appertenances to the charter are highly specific to the Venn location......especially when taken in context of the relation to 'St. Michael by the sea'. 
We know that Ictis was derived from Pytheas’ description and Avalon was Melkin’s name for the Island so it is quite possible that the Island was known locally as Romanella.  However the charter’s reference to towns, agricultural and non-agricultural land, could be wide ranging over the three river valleys that surrounded St. Michael by the sea.

 Figure 72 Shows ‘Hatch Bridge’ opposite Venn with the ancient Cart track (to the left) on which the ‘Linch pin’ was found. This track leads down from Dartmoor to this bridge opposite Venn at which point it turns here to follow the old route out to Ictis along the  Aveton Gifford Tidal road.

It has been postulated that Cadgwith, approximately 15 miles from St. Michael’s Mount is the lost port of Ruminella because it is half a mile from an inland village called Ruan Minor but this is not a port and neither does it have fishing mills.

As for the fortifications mentioned in the charter, there is little evidence left of anything substantial in the area from the period 600-900 when our old document that related these details was made. However when we contrast this against the Cornish mount as the determined goal for possession, rather than the mistaken mount, there is no Venn, no fishing mills, no port, and most importantly no tomb of Jesus or Joseph of Arimathea. It really does appear that the Monks of Mont-Saint-Michel were informed by a document of some sort on which to base their charter but it becomes clearer that it might have been them who named the island St. Michel’s Mount, carrying on their own Archangel heritage to establish the Cornish Mount. It can never be determined how large the area of venneshire is supposed to designate or which towns it included, however it makes little difference as the whole purport of the charter now finds its substantiation in Cornwall.

Edward the Confessor was the seventh son of Æthelred the Unready and Emma of Normandy sister of Richard, Duke of Normandy. He succeeded Cnut the Great's son Hardicanute restoring the rule of the House of Wessex after the period of Danish rule since Cnut had conquered England in 1016.  On Edward’s death in 1066 he was succeeded by Harold Godwinson who died at the Battle of Hastings fighting the Norman invasion.

Cnut had become king and Edward had gone into exile with his brother and sister, but his mother had married Cnut in 1017.  Cnut had Edward's half-brother Eadwig executed, leaving Edward as the leading Anglo-Saxon claimant to the throne.  If the monks of Mont-Saint-Michel had wished to secure a future Authority by which to obtain their rumoured British Island, the obvious person from which to receive their prospective claim of authority, would be Edward, the only surviving Anglo-Saxon who would probably become king. Edward spent nearly 25 years in Exile in Normandy and within this time there is no certainty of his whereabouts. It was during this time in exile that he became very pious (the Confessor), so is it not possible that he spent it on the mount in contemplation and hence the charter drawn up with Norman signatories prior to the Invasion.  It is also said that Edward ‘loved the holy company of people of religion. Who loved only that which was good; especially a monk who led a high and heavenly life’. Edward witnessed four charters in Normandy in the 1030’s signing two of them as king of England before he became king. He was supported  in his claim to the throne from a number of continental abbots, including Robert, abbot of the Norman abbey of Jumièges, who was to become Edward's Archbishop of Canterbury. This charter could well have been signed to gain support of his claim to the throne, for at this time his own mother in England supported Hardicanute, her son from Cnut.  Hardicanute nearing his death in 1041 invited Edward back to England and according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle Edward was sworn in as king alongside Hardicanute until his death, and in 1042 succeeded the throne. The fact that Robert, archbishop of Rouen a signatory to this charter died in 1037, leads one to suspect then that this charter was instigated while in Normandy before Edward’s succession . There seems to be no other clear reasonable intent considering the specifics of what was being granted other than the monks of Mont-Saint-Michel had designs upon a British Island called St. Michael by the Sea and this intention was based upon a rumour or evidence of what lay within. The only thing preventing them finding the tomb was that it was not in Cornwall.

As we know the propensity of these monks to claim their authority from previous documentation and to then skew the substance to be most advantageous for the present time, most scholars dismiss this charter as a forgery. After all it does appear rather random that the specifics given in the charter don’t seem to match the location in Cornwall. Edward can hardly be supposed to have had an intimate knowledge of the locality or of its conditions which seems to indicate that he was been guided by an older document presented by the Monks where the names of Vennefire and Ruminella had relevance.

 The fact that the cartulary was put together by copyists in the twelfth century and the cartulary in its present form is a fourteenth century product would allow much leeway for the interpolation of charters.  However since it is cited in Domesday it appears genuine but in a later charter regarding St. Michael’s Mount signed by the Earl of Mortain, William the Conquerors half brother, authority is appealed to by no lesser grandee than the Pope in its postscript and this appears to be a fabrication.

Due to the length of time since Melkin’s arrival at Mont-Saint-Michel and the change of Order to Benedictine, the location of the port known as Ruminella and the land known as Vennshire presumed to be associated with an Island in Britain became confused and the purport of the Charter was conveyed upon St. Michael’s mount in Cornwall after the Norman conquest.  The confusion and bickering later witnessed in Doomesday between the Earl and the French monks is in part caused by their mistaken claim. After the Conquest the contentions recorded in Domesday lend credibility to the position that it was a mistaken claim. It seems that the Mont-Saint-Michel community were after a British tomb of great importance that was explicitly on an Island but the rumoured hermitage that had existed when Melkin had left Britain had left no trace. So, by what might seem to be Divine intervention a Cornish Island was substituted in its place as the fabled place of the tomb and the name of Monte Tumba was again conveyed upon the Cornish mount along with numerous coincidental histories that emanated from Mont-Saint-Michel.

 A Hermitage that was based upon Burgh Island dissipated or was destroyed sometime between six and eight hundred AD of which there are still local rumours and it only seems natural that such an establishment should have existed a guardian to such a sacred place. If we again remember Melkin’s description which assumes some such religious structure ‘near where one prays at the verge’ from ‘adorandam virginem’, we can assume, based upon his past accuracy that he must have seen the building and assumed it would still be standing for those following his instructions. It also must be remembered that this allusion to the Virgin is in the concise instructional part of his directions and given his ability of transferring multi-faceted information it seems unlikely that his only intention was to confine our understanding to Glastonbury.

 However let us try to unravel further what has generally been accepted by convention. It seems apparent that the insular association with St. Michael, far from being derived from European sources as is most commonly postulated, is rather due to his association with the tomb that exists on the sacred isle in Devon from which it appears that the initial peculiar reference to a tomb at Mont-Saint-Michel was perpetuated. The Count of Mortain’s contribution to the invasion was regarded as significant, as can be judged from the lands he was granted by William the Conqueror.  He was granted 75 manors in Devon and held 248 manors in Cornwall, at the time of the compilation of Domesday.

The Cartulary of St. Michael’s Mount evidences a charter from Robert, Count of Mortain who some posit, became Earl of Cornwall around 1075 (before Domesday was compiled), in which  he supposedly conferred on the monks of St. Michaels Mount half a hide, three acres in Menaghek (Meneage) namely Treboe, Lesneage, Tregevas and Carvallack. This charter has a confirmation by a postscript in the Otterton Priory custumal, that the mount in Cornwall had by gift of Count Robert of Mortain lands for ploughing in Tremaine 3 in Traboe 3 in Lesneage 2 in Tregevas and 2 in Carvallack as well as  necessary pasture for all their livestock; which taken together makes twelve. 

He sunt possessiones quas ex dono comitis Roberti de Mortenio ecclcsia beati Michaelis de Cornubia tenet:Tremaine, ubi ad duas carucas terra sufiiciens habetur:Trahorabohc,ubi ad tres; Listyavehet, ubi ad tres ;Treganeis, ubi ad duas; Carmahelech, ubi ad duas. Adjacet terra preter pascua ad omnia animalia necessaria;que simul caruce xii faciunt.

Charter of Count Robert of Mortain

Monasticon

Catta Roberti Comitis, pro monachis S. Michaelis,

IN nomine sanctae et individuae Trinitatis, Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, amen. Ego Robertus Dei gratia Moritonii comes, igne divini amoris succensus, notifico omnibus sanctae ecclesiae matris nostrae filiis, habens in bello sancti Michaelis vexillum, quoniam pro animae meae salute atque meae conjugis, seu pro salute,

prosperitate, incolumitate Gulielmi gloriosissimi regis, atque pro adipiscendo vitae aeternae premio, do et concedo Montem Sancti Michaelis de Cornubia Deo et

monachis ecclesiae Sancti Michaelis de Periculo Maris servientibus, cum dimidia terrae hida, ita solutam et quietam ac liberam, ut ego tenebam, ab omnibus

consuetudinibus querelis et placitis ; et constituo etiam ut ipsi monachi, concedente domino meo rege, ibidem mercatum die quintae feriae habeant. Postea autem, ut

certissime comperi Beati Michaelis meritis monachorumque suffragiis michi a Deo ex propria conjuge mea filio concesso, auxi donum ipsi beato militiae celestis

Principi, dedi et dono in Amaneth tres acras terrae, Trevelaboth videlicet, Lismanoch, Trequaners, Carmailoc, annuente piissimo domino meo Gulielmo rege cum Mathilde regina atque nobilibus illorum filiis Roberto comite, Gulielmo Rufo, Henrico adhuc puero, ita quietam ae liberam de omnibus placitis querelis atque forisfactis, ut de nulla re regiae justitiae monachi respondebunt nisi de solo homicidio. Hanc autem donationem feci ego Robertus comes Moritonii, quam concesserunt gloriosus rex Anglorum Willielmus atque regina et filii eorum, sub testimonio istorum.

Signum Willielmi regis . Signum reginae Mathildis . Robert comitis . Willielmi Rufi filii regis . Henrici pueri . Roberti comitis Moritonii . Matildis Comitissae . Willielmi filii eorum . Signum Willielmi filii Osberni . Signum Rogeri de Monte - gomeri ,

Tossetini vicecomitis . Guarini . Turulfi .

‘In the name of the holy and indivisible Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, amen. I, Robert, Earl of Moriton by the grace of God, influenced by the  fire of divine love, Make known to all the children of our mother the holy church, supported  in  battle by the standard of St. Michael, seeing it was for the salvation of my soul, and my wife, and also the safety and
prosperity,  of the most glorious king William and for the acquiring of eternal life do give and grant the Mount of St. Michael of Cornwall to God and the monks serving in the ecclesiastical house of Sancti Michaelis de Periculo Maris, with half hide of the land, so unbound and peaceable and free from customs, pleas and complaints as I hold them, and I appoint, my lord the king consenting, that they may have a market the fifth day there. Finally, however, I have certainly ascertained through the merits of the blessed Michael monastery and by prayers of the monks there that a son has been granted me by God to my own wife; and therefore I have increased the gift to the heavenly Prince, and have given as a gift of three acres of land in Amaneth, Trevelaboth, Lismanoch, Trequaners, Carmailoc, that is to say my most pious king lord William assenting together with Queen Matilda and with their noble sons and nobles, the Earl Robert William Rufus, Henry yet a boy, to be quit and free from all pleas complaints, and forfeits, so that the  monks shall not answer in any matter this to the king's justice excepting homicide. I, Robert Moritonii, have made this donation, which wiliam glorious king of the English William, and the Queen and their children, have permitted and testified’.

 Although this charter professes to be dated and ratified in 1085 one of the undersigned Queen Matilda, who died in 1083, and another of Bishop Leofric, who died in 1072 seem to confirm that this is a fabrication.  Just the fact that it needs to be confirmed by the Bishop of Exeter raises suspicions and indicates that both may have been fabricated after the Counts death to substantiate or confirm the position of Lands held.  Another fault becomes obvious in the confirmation from Leofric Bishop of Exeter which also bears the date 1085, which pretends to be exempting by command of Pope Gregory, the church of St. Michael in Cornwall from episcopal control and conveying a remission of one-third of their penance to those who should enrich, endow or visit the said church. Pope Gregory did not become Pope until after Leofric's death.

The date or genuine-ness of the charter is doubtful given the anachronistic confirmation that follows. The Robert charter overtly states the location of St. Michael is ‘in Cornwall’ and this can be seen as a devise ostensibly  confirming the rights granted to them by Edward apply to the now established mount in Cornwall. The reason for implying that this charter and confirmation are a fabrication of much later date is for the anachronistic errors shown above, but more so if contestations between the Earl and the monks had been witnessed in Domesday, it would be a clever plan indeed to establish ones rights by the same person after his death.

The Monks of Mont-Saint-Michel were walking in cold to take over what they thought was an island containing the sacred tomb and of course there would be confusion and contention which is seen in Domesday even twenty years after their occupation. Nobody there had heard of Venn or Ruminella but this charter fabricated by the Monks themselves squarely enforces the Edward concession as applicable only to Cornwall and establishes their right by the very person who had reduced what they had initially appropriated. It would appear that the intent of the charter is twofold establishing ‘in Cornwall’, specifically determining the location by reiteration of evidences in Domesday, rather than the vagaries of unknown portions of land granted in the Edward charter. Secondly this faked charter specifically apportions them lands in the name of Robert. The only previous evidence is a contestation with the Count witnessed in Domesday but this contestation is based purely on the Edward charter and if this charter had been genuinely granted in 1085 why in Doomesday are they appealing to the Edward charter. If it was constructed just after there would not be so many faults with dating.

 The year of indiction is a 15-year cycle and originally referred to the periodic reassessment for an agricultural or land tax. The year of indiction is calculated by adding three years  to the year of Our Lord and dividing the sum by fifteen. The remainder after division is the year of indiction. Pope Gregory V11 Hildebrand  didn’t  became  pope until 22 April 1073 the same year that Bishop Leofric died while the year 1085 was the eighth year of indiction and 1073 the eleventh year of indiction not as the document declares as the fourteenth.

 This charter said to have been ratified at Penvensel in October 1085 essentially establishes for posterity that the chosen Island that they initially believed the tomb to be on, was now of certain location ‘in Cornwall’ even though the port and its fisheries are nowhere to be seen.

Firmata abque roborata est hec carta, anno millessimo

octuagesimo quinto ab incarnatione Domini indictione

decima quarta, concurrente tertia, luna octava, apud

Pevenesel.

Signum Liurici Essecestriae Episcopi . Ego quidem Liuricus Dei dono Essecestriae episcopus, jussione et exhortatione domini mei reverentissimi Gregorii papae regisque nostri et reginae omniumque optimatum totius regni Angliae exhortatus ut ecclesiam Beati Michaelis archangeli de Cornubia, utpote quae officio et ministerio angelico creditur atque comprobatur consecrari ac sanctificari, quatenus eam ab omni episcopali jure, potestate, seu subjectione libcrarem atque exuerem, quod et facere totius cleri nostri consensu et hortatu non distuli, libero igitur eam et exuo ab omni episcopali dominatione, subjectione, et inquietudine, et omnibus illis qui illam ecclesiam suis cum beneficiis et elemosinis expetierint, et visitaverint, tertiam partem penitentiarum condonamus. Et ut hoc inconcussum et immobile et etiam inviolabile fine tenus permaneat, ex authoritatc Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti omnibus nostris successoribus interdicimus ne aliquid contra hoc decretum usurpare praesumant.

Signum ejusdem Liurici Essecestriae episcopi.

‘I leofric, by the gift of God Bishop of Exeter, having been urged to free and exempt so far from all episcopal law, authority or submission, the church of Blessed Michael the Archangel of Cornwall, seeing that it is believed and acknowledged to be consecrated and sanctified by the office and ministry of angels, by command and exhortation of my lord the most reverend Pope Gregory and of our King and Queen and of all the nobles of the entire realm of England, to which end I have not delayed to do. So with consent and approval of all our clergy, I do accordingly liberate and exempt it from all episcopal rule, subjection and disturbance and to all those who shall have longed to visit and shall have visited that church with alms and offerings, we do remit a third part of their penance.  So that this may remain forever unshaken unchanged and also inviolable, by the authority of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, we forbid all our successors from presuming to attempt anything contrary to this decree’.

 Between Edward’s Charter and Domesday the French mount had established a presence based solely on the authority of that Charter. The main reason for the Robert charter is actually showing us that the Benedictine right to the Cornish mount based upon Edward’s charter needed to be backed up by the Earl of Mortain the ‘then’ overlord indicated by the date but it could not have been constructed near to the proposed date if we take into account all the inaccuracies. Certainly Domesday mentions that the Earl retracts land from the Cornish mount, but this could be based upon what they had seized founded on Edward’s charter and most probably from what the previous Celtic order of Brismarus held, rather than what had been granted by Robert’s.  This seems to highlight by the substantial errors a confirmation both the charter and the postscript to be of later date.

  It is likely that Leofrics confirmation was fabricated to establish pilgrims.  William of Worcester says a document was found among the ancient registers of the Cornish mount but one can see that the monks had accomplished even more trickery by pre-dating the forged document to 1070 before the Doomesday survey essentially presenting a confirmation of a charter that was not written supposedly until 15 years later. However this is of the same substance as what one can only assume was the fabricated postscript that preceded it and was quoted by William of Worcester in his travelogue as an account found at the Mount when he visited.

 To all members of the holy mother church, who shall read or hear these letters peace and salutation. Be it known unto you all, that our most holy lord Pope Gregory in the year of the Lords incarnation 1070 (from the cartulary) out of his great zeal and devotion to the church of Mount St. Michael in Tumba, in the county of Cornwall, hath piously granted to the aforesaid church, which is entrusted to the angelical ministry, and with full approbation consecrated and sanctified, a remission to all the faithful who shall enrich, endow or visit the said church, a third part of their penance and that this grant may remain for ever unshaken and inviolable, by the authority of God the Father Almighty, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, he forbids all his successors from attempting to make any alteration against this decree’.

 The difference is that Leofrics name is not mentioned and 1070 is three years before Gregory became Pope but William of Worcester then writes: ‘These very words found in old registers, discovered afresh in this church, are accordingly placed here publicly on the doors of the church. And inasmuch as this matter is unknown to many, therefore we in Christ, the servants of God and ministers of this church, require and beg all of you who have the direction of souls, for the spreading of the news one to another, to publish those words in your churches in order that those who are under rule and control may be the more earnestly roused to greater eagerness in devotion and by pilgrimage frequent that place in greater splendour to offer gifts and graciously obtain the indulgences

This of course as we know was to be placed publicly on the gates of the church and to be publicly read aloud in other churches, that the devout might be induced to visit the mount more frequently and in greater numbers. What essentially indicates this to be a later invention is that the supposed granted privilege by the Bishop of Exeter in 1085 was not actively promoted by the monks to gain pilgrims prior to its later discovery. This probably indicates that the previous fabrication was found to be contestable in that it was dated to Doomesday to overcome the problems throw up by that survey but was later found to have the anachronistic errors we have mentioned. This later fabrication with the earlier date was probably comprised to overcome these chronological errors, still appeal to the supposed Papal indulgence and to currently act as an advertising campaign to induce pilgrims.

 The claim to the Cornish mount was quick and carried out in the confusion after the conquest and all the rest is window dressing apart from what is genuinely recorded in Domesday, but by this time the usurpation was complete and the Monks of Mont-Saint-Michel having got what they thought was their prize set about establishing the cult of St. Michael in Cornwall on what they thought was the tomb. Certainly William the Conquerer or his half-brother Robert would only have permitted, the monks of Mont-Saint-Michel to make this claim based upon the Edward charter because the monks had deserved their gratitude by supplying them after the Conquest with six ships and a number of monks, destined to assist in the restoration of ecclesiastical discipline in England. It must also not be forgotten that William the Conqueror was a patron also of the Mont-Saint- Michel establishment.

The Annales Cambriae, first compiled and then expanded at St. David's in the late eighth and ninth century, also bear witness that a ‘Consecratio Michaelis archangeli ecclesiae’  existed in 718 in the period long before the establishment of the Cornish or Benedictine house on Mont-Saint-Michel was known. This church dedicated to the Archangel Michael certainly would not be refering to St. Michael's Mount in Cornwall, not built until 1135 and consecrated only in 1144. It is doubtful that at this early stage only 10 years after St. Auberts apparent establishment of Mont-Saint-Michel that its fame had spread to warrant mention in the Welsh Annals.  More probably and certainly with no Cornish connection, the establishment of ‘Consecratio Michaelis archangeli ecclesiae’ specified in the Annales, would have been the Burgh Island establishment.  This ecclesiastical house in 718, probably one and the same mentioned by Speed in his history was the recently and previously unknown group of Hermits established in association with Melkin before he left for France.  It is doubtful whether it would be worthy of mention in these ancient welsh texts except in relation to the already established order of St. Michael on Burgh Island as opposed to the continental Mont-Saint-Michel still itself only a small hermitage.

In post-conquest medieval England, land was not owned as such in the modern sense, by anyone but the monarch and the authority by which the monks of Mont-Saint-Michel had made their claim was by the last English Monarch.  Normally land was held by tenants, from lords in return for recompense. This was the feudal system, with the king at the top of the ladder, descending down in pyramidal fashion to the peasant farmers who held a few acres in return for labouring on the land of the local lord.  Land held by a lord himself, rather than by his tenants, was known as demesne and this could be owned or have been granted to a religious order. In the twenty years from 1066 to Domesday, the monks had laid claim to local lands. It is for this reason we see the contradictory adding and subtraction of Land in Cornwall mentioned in Domesday, that must have been previously allotted before any claim was laid.

 By appealing to the Authority of Edward in the initial charter the hope of the Norman house was to show credibility based upon old Documents that would allow them to retake their British possession that was pre-ordained in sanctimonious tones that no other subsequent claimant might dare to challenge such an ancient right. This however did have its difficulties in usurping lands from existing Saxon era tenants and thus the reversal of some lands that were said to have been in possession prior to the Conquest that are evidenced in Domesday.

 This charter has no relevance geographically to the existing Edward Charter and really seems to be the document that establishes what was once a Devonian location, into a Cornish one. Strangely enough, the Norman Benedictines position is ostensibly bolstered by Leofric and Robert’s date to confirm that which was assessed by Domesday but in no way confirms by what is written in Domesday that the Robert charter existed or Bishop Leofrics confirmation, but rather the two were constructed as an affirmation of what was decreed by Domesday.

There are three references in the Exeter Domesday Book and two in the Exchequer Book which in no way clear anything up but does show that the Edward grant was the Authority on which the monks based their claim

Terra Sancti Michaelis De Cornugallia. -Sanctus Michael habet unam mansionem quae vocatur Treiwal quam tenuit Brismarus ea die qua rex Edwardus fuit vivus et mortuus. In ea sunt ii hidae terrae quae nonquam reddiderunt gildam. Has possunt arare viii carrucae. Ibi habet Sanctus Michahel i carmcam. . . . De hac mansione abstulit comes de Moritonio i de praedictis ii hidis quae erat de dominicatu beati Michahelis.

What can be established is that one Brismarus who we assume is the persona being referenced in place of the St. Michael establishment has one manor which is called Treiwal and this manor was held in the day that Edward was (vivus et mortuus) ‘alive and dead ’i.e at his death. Twenty years after Edwards death, this Brismar who could have been in charge or head of the old Celtic hermitage, is as a person in antiquity, being appealed as having had charge over the land.  From this excerpt many have assumed that there was already an established cult of St. Michael at the mount prior to the Benedictine arrival. This may well be true and the cause of the Benedictines mistaken claim to the wrong Island. If we are correct in assuming that the Burgh Island community mentioned in the Welsh annals was no longer present in Devon these same monks for any unspecified reason could have established themselves further south on a similar Island. There is no mention of a prior community but we cannot rule this out with the person of Brismarus being representative of the mounts lands. Whether referring in an unclear manner to lands supposedly granted by Edward that Norman monks had in recent times usurped and paid no Geld on in the last 20 years or the initial Celtic community paid no tax is unclear. We know the deviousness of these monks and by way of appealing to Brismarus, maybe they are usurping his heritage establishing a continuity that did not exist before the Norman monks claimed the Island for themselves.

 Anyway, there are two hides of land which have never paid geld and from this manor the Earl of Mortain has taken away one of the two hides which was of Blessed Michael's demesne. The question is, why is the person who purportedly granted the land being recorded as reducing it. If a St. Michael of Cornwall religious house did not exist before the Conquest how is it possible that it had lands in demesne in the time of Edward or is this Edwardian Charter being given the air of antiquity to the Domesday recorder. Is this just a ploy of the newly established monks having just acquired land (with a document to prove their ownership) trying to establishing a link with antiquity?   Is this not a case of the monks trying to show that not only do they not pay Geld but receive it just as it was in the days of Brismar? The expression ‘nunquam geldaverunt’ meaning ‘have never paid geld’ does imply a precedent afforded to Brismarus, and quite possibly an amicable arrangement was made by the Normans to take over from the previous religious body.

 Since the survey was taken in 1085 it is most likely the reason for the Robert charter purporting to be of the same date. As we have seen Count Robert’s charter gives to St. Michael's Mount with half a hide of land and a market on Thursdays and lands in Amaneth. But this excerpt and others in Domesday  make no mention of lands in Amaneth and no mention of the market so why all the discrepancies except the Robert charter was of a later date.

‘Sanctus Michael habet i mansionem quae vocatur Treiwal de qua abstulit comes de Moritonio i hidam, quae erat in dominicatu Sancti die qua rex Edwardus fuit vivus et mortuus’.

This second exerpt from Exeter Domesday confirms the first saying St. Michael has one manor, which is called Treiwal, from which the Count of Mortain has taken away one hide which was in the demesne of St. Michael on the day upon which King Edward died. If the charter annexing the Cornish mount to Mont-Saint-Michel does not correlate to what is being recorded as fact in Domesday, why should we believe it is anything other than fabricated given the inaccuracies. Is it not just another attempt to substantiate the seal of ownership by reference to the contestation that was recorded in Domesday. The fact that Robert had subtracted land just affirms their right as established purely based on the Edward charter. Although their land was reduced there is nothing in the Norman scheme of things to confirm their right except based upon a grant given by a now conquered kingdom.  Hence it appears that the fabricated charter was composed after Domesday not only to confirm that Robert by his actions knew of the Benedictine presence but even though he had reduced their land portion had by means of this action added credence to their right by what he left in their possession.

 It does  indeed appear that Mont-Saint-Michel then needed the Cornish St. Michael’s mount annexed to the Norman Mount in concrete terms based upon the Norman power base and hence a later Robert Charter. This fabricated charter being confirmed to benefit Mont-Saint-Michel where Leofric's signature informs us that by command and counsel of Pope Gregory and of the King, and the rest of the undersigned, the Bishop of Exeter grants immunity from all episcopal control to the church of Blessed Michael the Archangel in Cornwall.

The third passage from Exeter Domesday tells us that Treival is actually Treuthal and that Bluhidus Brito (Blohiu of Brittany) holds it for the Count. Comes habet i mansionem quae vocatur Treuthal quam tenuit Brismarus sacerdos ea die qua rex Edwardus fuit vivus et mortuus. In ea est i hida terrae et reddit gildum (sic) Sancto Michaele (sic). Hanc abstulit comes Sancto. Bluhidus Brito tenet earn de comite.

 Present day Truthwall a mile or so from the Mount was the place of residence in the parish of Ludgvan of the Bloyou family the descendants of Bluhidus Brito who was holding the land for the Count. This tells us that the Benedictines had overstated their claim and there was obvious contestation between the Benedictine house claiming precedent by Brismarus, but the Count had revoked this claim most probably on the grounds of complaint by Bluhid Brito a Bretton family installed before the conquest and the recent Benedictine usurpation. It is not likely that the recently arrived Benedictines would have cited Edward as the patron of the Cornish house if there had been some earlier patron to cite.

Whatever else Doomesday can show us by this small amount of detail concerning St. Michael’s mount, we can assume tin was not the reason for the Benedictines coming as these discrepancies only appear to relate to Agricultural land and the paying of geld upon these. What it does show us is that the Edward charter is probably genuine as the Monks would not have had any premise on which to stake their claim at the mount excepting the Norman invasion and the bureaucratic muddle that followed. Basically Domesday was instigated to assess the rights under Saxon Kings and these rights would remain valid even though fealty to the Norman house had been transferred. Benedictine communities had existed in England for several centuries prior to the Norman Conquest and they held lands granted to them by Saxon kings, so they knew when Edward was with them at the French mount circa 1030 that this might be their only opportunity to gain possession of the British mount rumoured to contain a tomb, especially after the recent attempted invasion.  

  When we look at Domesday it supplies information upon the subject of Cornish ecclesiastical organisations before the Norman conquest and we can see at the time of the Great Survey (1086), the Bishop of Exeter held the following manors in Cornwall and St. Michael’s Mount is only mentioned in the context we have discussed.

Treliuel (Treluswell in St. Gluvias).

Matela (Methleigh in St. Breage).

Tregel (Trewell in St. Feock).

Pauton (Pawton in St. Breock).

Berner (Burneir in Egloshayle).

St. German (St. Germans).

Lanherneu (Lanherne in Pydar).

Tinten (Tinten in St. Tudy).

Languititon (Lawhitton).

Landicla (Gulval).

St. Winnuc (St. Winnow).

If there were a hermitage or religious establishment based at the mount, then Brismarus is the only one appealed to as having having had rights. On balance it would seem an insurmountable position to contend with Earl Robert while appealing ownership from a Saxon Charter unless there had been some sort of agreed take-over of a previous body.  This indeed may have seemed a good solution with promised advantages for the original inhabitants.

Does it not seem an odd coincidence that the one man who left the British Grail tomb had an apparition of an angel by which means the Grail became known in France and an Island for which no reason (except contrived) is named after the Chief of Angels. Yet the Michael establishment in Britain named as such in the Welsh Annals and after which the Templars marked out their design contains the most famous tomb and no account exists (except a mere apology) of how the French Island got its association with a tomb.

 The name Mons Tumba has remained the recognized name of the Norman Mount, and has survived to the present day. The church and monastery there were called ‘in monte Tumba’ or  ‘ad duas Tumhas’ there being two islands isolated in the bay at low tide. The principal one called Mons Tumba and the smaller Tumbella, Tumbellana or Tombelaine. The small Island 3.5 km to the north-east of Mont-Saint-Michel is now called Tombelaine and some commentators have proffered that its name originated from being the smaller island and its appellation is somehow the diminutive of Tumba. The naming of the second Island we can assume by later interpretation and interpolation because the first was supposedly named by its configuration, having no other explanation of its nomenclature. The Paris edition of ‘Le Grand Dictionaire Historique’ by M. Louis Morei gives Augustin Bishop of Avranches seeing a vision of the Archangel but more interestingly it says this mount called Monte De Tombe was named because of its shape and was once situated in a forest and the land extended to the parish de Tanis et d’Ardevon until the sea destroyed this forest for which reason the mount has become known as Mont Saint Michel in Peril of the Sea. One can understand ‘in periculo maris’ as a descriptive derivative from the Revelatio account but nothing seems to be a reasonable explanation of the tomb appellation. In Dom. Beaunier’s ‘Recueil general des Eveques abbayes’ mentioned already, it says the Norman mount was called

‘Mont Saint Michel, ou Mont de Tombe, Tombelaine, ou peril de Mer, en Latin Sancti Michaëlis in Periculo Maris. On l’appelle encore Tumba  aut Sanctus Michael ad duas tumbas, ainsi nommée á cause des deux écüeils, dont le plus haut sur lequel est bâtie l’Abbaïe des Benedictins s’appelle Tombe.’

 Since we know that the French mount never lays claim to being the Tomb of anyone of importance, is its appellation from an early date purely a reflection of its association through Melkin’s knowledge of that other insular Island in Britain.  The ‘Duas Tumbas’, nowadays is definitely synonymous with the two French islands but could this be a rationalisation of a much earlier association with the British tomb.

 However, by 1200 the Cornish mount is well established and it is unclear in the charter circa 1257 of Richard 1st Earl of Cornwall  whether he is now using the term Monte tombae in reference to the now well established Benedictine Cornish house or if they are celebrating the St. Aubert appearance. The charter establishes that from this time forward it had become a commercial success and in the two hundred years since its usurpation the monks were now in the legitimate location.

Richard by the grace Of God, King of the Romans and always Augustus to the Bishops, Abbats, Priors, Earls, Barons and to all holding free tenures and to others his lieges in the county of Cornwall, health and every good. May you all know that we, by this our present confirmation, have granted and confirmed to the Prior of the Blessed Michael in Cornwall, and to his Successors, that they may have and hold, and for ever possess, the three fairs and three markets on their own proper ground in Marchadyon, near the Barn. These three fairs and three markets they have hitherto held by the concession of our predecessors Kings of England in Marghasbigan, on ground belonging to others; that is to say, on the middle day in lent and on the following day. Also on the eve of the blessed Michael, and on the following eve of the blessed Michael in Monte Tombae, and on the following day, provided that these fairs and markets may not cause any damage or injury to others fairs or markets in conformity with the laws and customs of this Kingdom of England.

 From the time that the Benedictines arrived, it is not difficult to understand how the Cornish mount also became associated with a tomb as by this time St. Michael’s mount had inherited much of the French mounts history just as they themselves had done from Monte Gargano. Legend describes Mont-Saint-Michel being surrounded by a forest known as Scissy and the same tradition at St. Michael's Mount tells of a similar forest that was eventually swallowed up by the encroaching sea spawning the ‘Hoare rock in the wood’ as an ancient Cornish designation for the Mount. William says that ‘Hore-rok in the Wodd’, was the mounts former name before the flooding which happened at a time when woodland and meadow and plough land lay between the said Mount and the islands of Scilly, and there were 240 parish churches now submerged.  Monks would travel between the two Mounts and as we can see from William of Worcester’s diary the Cornish house had taken on a near duplication of the French accounts in that Mont-Saint- Michel and St. Michael’s mount were both said to have been flooded in recent times. Both of these legends are proven archaeologically to be unsound.

 Relics and books would travel from one place to the other, and charters originally belonging to the one, might afterwards form part of the archives of another house and the legends over the centuries would get intermingled. This can be witnessed in William of Worcester itinerary which is a curious assortment of information compiled in the year 1478 as a note book of random information. It was written about half a century after the expulsion of the Benedictines and the introduction of the Bridgettines Nuns to the Cornish mount. From it we can see that the same process of establishing sanctity from antiquity is re-enacted all over again. Norden, writing in 1584, states that the Mount ‘hath bene muche resorted unto by Pylgrims in devotion to St. Michaell whose chayre is fabled to be in the Mount, on the south syde, of verie daungerous access’. The expression ‘fabled to be’ indicates that the process of invention to an Apparition in Cornwall to gain status had occurred a long time previously. The Archangel was said to have appeared to St. Kenna but no details are given and she is supposed to be synonymous with St. keyna where she had founded a monastery elsewhere back in the six hundred’s and thus vicariously dating the apparition and the Cornish mounts ancient sanctity all the way back to the Dark Ages. Michael’s chair and a host of other peculiarities are mentioned but the point of pursuing the investigation of the two British mounts is because it is through these two islands that we drew the initial Lyonesse line that started this enquiry.

 Is Melkin’s direction from the St.Michael ley line in any way connected to the Lyonesse line or is the St. Michael design purely a coincidental alignment to a random set of Neolithic earthworks.

How did Melkin know this line would be discovered? Did the Templars construct extra marker Chapels and Churches, all with St. Michael dedications, because they feared Avalon would never be discovered.  Whatever conclusion the reader comes to, it is St. Michael that is the initial link that started this chain of events whether it is from John Mitchell’s ley line discovery, the Templar geometry or more probably from Melkin’s experience or understanding and what remains within the island will be discovered in 2012. It would of course have been more acceptable to have been granted permission to open the tomb before publishing these pages so that what has been proposed as a set of events could be verified, but unfortunately the Author has been thwarted and hopefully this book will influence the uncovering of these sacred relics.

The ‘New Age’ positive interpretation of a 2012 paradigm shift is that this date marks the start of time in which the peoples of world will undergo a spiritual transformation. Is this the 1000 year period of Biblical time which still remains to complete the seven days in which man accomplishes full consciousness. The Negative interpretation is that it is the end of the world. It is not as if the world does not need an end in its present perception of received global conventions. Capitalism has become the religion of the world and mammon its Temple.

If Biblical time is a cognisable means of understanding a Divine Plan as we have discussed in these pages, maybe the Mayans a pyramidal and calendric culture are correct in their prediction of a new age emerging at the end of the thirteenth Baktun in 2012, because as it states in Isaiah 52:10, ‘The Lord will lay bare his holy arm in the sight of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth will see the salvation of our God’. The prophets words will be proved accurate when they uncover the Grail Ark and find him ‘whose appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness, so will he sprinkle many nations, and kings will shut their mouths because of him. For what they were not told, they will see, and what they have not heard, they will understand’.


Chapter 20.


 

We have seen in our investigation, the persistent rumours of Joseph of Arimathea in Britain and how it is that we have been misdirected as to his burial place.  But when we start to search into how it is that the Britons have a tradition of St. Paul coming to Britain and whether this is true…… we can start to understand why and which institution has been behind re-writing the sequence of events that transpired directly after the crucifixion. Both Joseph of Arimathea and St.Paul came to Britain, but since the very beginning of the Roman Church’s claim to primacy….. wherever possible any evidence of these visits has been purposefully obscured.   We should not only question why the tradition has somewhat been subdued, but why did St. Paul so wish to visit Spain and the British Isles. We can understand through the connections we have seen through Zerah, how it is that the ancient Britons had such a comprehensive understanding of the nature of the soul; Ceasar writing in 54 BC of the Druidic religion ’the druids make the immortality of the soul the basis of all their teaching, holding it the principal incentive and reason for a virtuous life’.

So let us look at a little known and often dismissed document that has much in common with our previous investigations. The

document is now understood to be chapter 29 of the original Acts of the Apostles and  was translated by C. S. Sonnini from an original Greek manuscript found in the Archives at Constantinople, and presented to him by the Sultan Abdoul

Achmet while he visited.  It gives an account of trips undertaken by Paul after his two years enforced residence in Rome in his own hired house. This lost Chapter 29 of the Acts was found interleaved in a copy of the French naturalist Sonnini de Manoncourt ‘Voyage en Grèce et en Turquie’- Sonnini's Travels in Turkey and Greece. It was purchased at the sale of the library and effects of the late Right Hon. Sir John Newport, Bart, MP (1756–1843) in Ireland, whose family arms were engraved on the cover of the book.  It had been in their possession for more than thirty years, with a copy of the royal decree (firman) of the Sultan of Turkey, granting to C. S. Sonnini, permission to travel in all parts of the Ottoman dominions.

 No trace of the original Greek manuscript has been found to date and for this reason the document is considered a fake. Also the document appeared at a time when supposedly ’a new theory’ was in vogue that the Britons were part of the lost tribes of Israel. Few have considered that if a Frenchman had been handed the original, he would most certainly have handed it to a Catholic authority for verification and one can assume the original would never be heard of again if in essence, it glorified holy links to Britain.

 

 

The title page of Sonnini's work, in which the English translation of the document was found has this written upon it:

"Travels in Turkey and Greece undertaken by order of Louis XVI, and with the authority of the Ottoman Court by C. S. Sonnini, member of several scientific or literary societies of the Society of Agriculture of Paris, and of the Observers of Men. 'Mores multorum videt et ubes.' — HOR., London; Printed for T. N. Longman and O. Rees, Paternoster Row, 1801."

The text first came to light in London in 1871 when it was printed as a six page pamphlet by Geo. J. Stevenson entitled: The long lost chapter of the Acts of the Apostles: containing an account of the Apostle Paul's journey into Spain and Britain, and other interesting events.

 

  Should we look upon this Chapter 29 document as being eradicated from all extant copies of the Acts of the apostles by the Roman religion at a very early date specifically to eradicate any notion the British might have of having primacy over Rome? Or was it an early gloss of a version before any consolidation of New testament material. Why should we not believe that this Chapter 29 did not exist as part of a manuscript version of Acts?  The manuscripts from the Western text-type (as represented by the Codex Bezae) and the Alexandrian text-type (as represented by the Codex Sinaiticus) are the earliest surviving texts of Acts. The version of Acts preserved in the Western manuscripts contains about 10% more content than the Alexandrian version of Acts. Why should some unadulterated version not exist in Constantinople, far from the desire of those ready to re-write history and who were bent on establishing their own merit.

 

 Much as we saw earlier, was it  the long hand of Rome trying to eradicate Father Good’s testimony concerning Montacute because after the dissolution…… the finding of Joseph of Arimathea would confirm the primacy of the British church? Even though Father Good had initially deposited his information in the English College in Rome, had it not been for the existence of Maihew’s Trophea remaining unadulterated in Stillingfleet’s private collection …… so it is with this extant copy of Chapter 29, preserved far away from the hands of Rome. The Papacy has perverted the truth about events after the crucifixion and eradicated evidence of St. Pauls visit to Britain.

 A brilliant assessment of Paul’s visit to Britain can be found in a book first published in 1861 subtitled ‘The origin of British as opposed to Papal Christianity’ by the Rev R.W. Morgan better known as ‘St Paul in Britain’.

However, as to the genuineness of Sonnini's work and the fact that he did witness chapter 29 in Turkey, seems beyond doubt when one considers he was traveling during the reign of Louis XVI, who reigned from A.D. 1774 to A.D.1793 and would have published during this period or soon thereafter. Why, one must ask, would a Frenchman fabricate or bear witness to a manuscript which confers on Britain…… a visit of Saint Paul especially as Sonnini would have been a Catholic. This could have been understandable as a work of polemic written by the British, but a work by a Frenchman confirms its validity. Or is it a very clever fake? This would seem highly unlikely given the connection with the first church that was established at Rome by the British royal family.

What possible objective could he hope for in confirming that the English who had already protested and refused submission to Papal superiority, in obtaining proof of genuine primacy over Rome for the English Church, especially when the English were their enemy at the time?

 

In the second letter of St. Paul to Timothy (2 Timothy 4:21), St. Paul sends to Timothy the greetings of “Eubulus, Pudens, Linus, Claudia and all the brethren”.  Claudia, the only woman to be mentioned is said by tradition to be the wife of Pudens and that she was the mother or sister of Linus,  who was the second Bishop of Rome and St. Peter’s successor after his death.

 Some have assumed that Claudia Rufina is the same Claudia being greeted and who was married to Aulus Pudens a senator and friend of Martial, the poet. She was definitely British and described by Martial  as `sprung from the woad-stained Britons'.

   It is not sure if she was the daughter of an exiled British King, living in Rome, Tiberius Claudius Cogidubnus, who ruled as a Roman client in the late 1st century or the daughter of the British resistance leader Caratacus who gave the famous speech in the Senate.  Arviragus (from whom Joseph was said to have received the 12 Hides and the island of Avalon) was the son of King Cunobelinus, the Cymbeline of Shakespeare, and the cousin of Caradoc, whom the Romans named Caractacus.

If this is the same Claudia as the friend of St. Paul…… Claudia and Pudens were also the hosts of St. Peter and their house which became the church of St. Pudentiana in Rome  was the place where St. Peter celebrated Mass i.e the First Church in Rome was in fact established by Britons.

 It would seem then that the Roman Church founded on St. Peter had been entertained by offspring from a Royal king that had already accepted the truth of Jesus as the Messiah…… and such readiness to receive the truth could have been established by the presence of Joseph of Arimathea in Britain straight after the crucifixion. It is this presence of Britons in Rome and persistent rumours of the Holy Family settling in Britain…… which at a later time has caused the Roman Church to assert its primacy. Especially, when these pretentions became a point of contention between later Bishops partly due to a struggle to establish creeds and dogma and also due to the contention of events provided by British sources as to what surpassed immediately after the crucifixion. Three hundred years after these contentions, St John Chrysostom (347-407 AD) writes in his ‘Contra Judacos’: “Even the British Isles have felt the power of the Word, for there too churches and altars have been erected: there too, as in the extreme East, or in the South, men may be heard discussing points of Scripture, with different voices, but not with different belief.”

Those in the South of England did not disagree on points of Scripture because; by this time it was probably only the Grail Keepers who knew of the unknown body that lay within the Island of Avalon. Obviously it is this tradition which is subliminally born witness to throughout the Perlesvaus, as we have discovered…… that the remains of Jesus were buried in England.

 The end result of these events as we can see today is that the Roman Church has made into fable or myth any account of Joseph’s arrival.  For the Roman Church to sanitize any mention of St. Paul’s visit to England makes one conclude there were early contentions as the Roman Church tried to bring the British traditions into submission which as we have seen is corroborated later on by St. Augustine.

 

Chapter 29 is written in the style of the Acts and reads like a continuation of it and has the appearance of being of ancient date as if it were by the same Author as Acts. The places named are the Roman appellations and the peoples named are also likewise in their ancient forms such as Helvetia and Belgae and Lud. The original text would have been written in Greek…… and in the same style and tone as the Acts of the Apostles.  It is written in the same matter of fact way as the Acts is written and shows little signs of a hidden agenda or fabricated polemic. It would seem that a feasible answer as to how it has survived……… is that it was preserved in the Archives of Constantinople, far from the re-writers of history in Rome.

What is remarkable about this last chapter is its prophetic expressions and its understanding and concurrence of the underlying Divine Plan as outlined in this expose. None can say emphatically who the Acts of the Apostles was written by, but it would appear to be Luke ‘the companion of Paul’ (named in Colossians 4:14) for reasons that both prefaces are addressed to Theophilus…… and in the preface of the Acts it explicitly references "my former book", which does suggest it was Luke. However there is no Amen at the end of Chapter 28 and in every book written by Paul it concludes with the word "Amen" just as it does here in Acts 29:26 so considering some small contradictions that can be found in Luke…… Acts may well have been a joint venture with anecdotal evidences added by Paul himself or a travelling companion.

 

Whether he went on to Spain at this occasion as he had planned in Romans 15:24, I plan to do so when I go to Spain. I hope to visit you while passing through and to have you assist me on my journey there, after I have enjoyed your company for a while, or again in Romans 15:28, So after I have completed this task and have made sure that they have received this fruit, I will go to Spain and visit you on the way……. or was prevented until later, is not evident. He does however state that his visit was only for a short period and can be seen as heading back in the direction of Rome.

Chapter 29 has barely been dealt with by Papal theologians since its discovery as it has largely been ignored. This is probably because it tells of Paul going to Spain, and then on to the British Isles and this raises too many inconsistencies in the now standardised Roman version of events. The proximity and implications of this visit by St. Paul also add credence to the rumours of the Holy Family’s voyage that it has taken the Roman Church millennia to stamp out.

 They had managed to reduce the story of Joseph’s voyage to Britain to the rank of rumour, romance or legend, but St. Paul’s visit to Britain would add credibility to the English professing primacy in the establishment of the first Church.

 Theodoretus, in his commentary on 2 Timothy 4:6 wrote, ‘When Paul was sent by Festus on his appeal to Rome, he travelled, after being acquitted into Spain, and thence extended his travels into other countries and ‘To the islands surrounded by the sea’,  indicate this surely was the British Isles, so this might well have occurred after his aquittal.  Theodoretus was the Bishop of Cyropolis and he attended the General Council at Ephesus in A.D. 431 and at Chalcedon in A.D. 451 consisting of 600 Bishops…… so his witness should be taken seriously since it also concurs with this account given in  the chapter 29 version of events. In A.D. 435 Theodoretus wrote, "Paul, liberated from his first captivity at Rome, preached the Gospel to Britons and others in the West. Our fishermen and publicans (the Disciples) not only persuaded the Romans and their tributaries to acknowledge the Crucified and His laws, but the Britons also and the Cimbri (Cymry)." Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, wrote in A.D. 320, "The Apostles passed beyond the ocean to the isles called the Britannic Isles." In A.D. 600, Venantius Fortunatus wrote of Britain as having been "evangelized" by St. Paul.

 

 

The Sonnini Manuscript is almost certainly the concluding portion of the "Acts of the Apostles", and gives an account of Paul's journeys after his two years enforced residence in Rome. The following is the English translation of the Sonnini Manuscript, which was originally written in Greek, translated to French and English. This unscriptural chapter 29 is enlightening in its concurrence of the divine plan which we have covered earlier in our investigation and reports on where Paul visited after his visit to Rome.

Acts 29:1 "And Paul, full of the blessings of Christ, and abounding in the spirit, departed out of Rome, determining to go into Spain, for he had a long time purposed to journey thitherward, and was minded also to go from thence into Britain."

Acts 29:2 "For he had heard in Phoenicia that certain of the children of Israel, about the time of the Assyrian captivity, had escaped by sea to the isles afar off," as spoken by the prophet, and called by the Roman's Britain."

Acts 29:3 "And the Lord commanded the gospel to be preached far hence to the Gentiles, and to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Acts 29:4 "And no man hindered Paul; for he testified boldly of Jesus before the tribunes and among the people and he took with him certain of the brethren which abode with him at Rome, and they took shipping at Ostium, and having the winds fair, were brought safely into an haven of Spain.

Acts 29:5 "And much people were gathered together from the towns and villages, and the hill country; for they had heard of the conversion of the apostle, and the many miracles which he had wrought."

Acts 29:6 "And Paul preached mightily in Spain, and great multitudes believed and were converted, for they perceived he was an apostle sent from God."

Acts 29:7 "And they departed out of Spain, and Paul and his company finding a ship in Armorica sailed unto Britain, they went therein, and passing along the South coast they reached a port called Raphinus."

Acts 29:8 "Now when it was noised abroad that the apostle had landed on their coast, great multitudes of the inhabitants met him, and they treated Paul courteously, and he entered in at the east gate of their city, and lodged in the house of an Hebrew and one of his own nation."

Where exactly the port of Raphinus was is not clear but if this whole chapter was an invention why not use a more plausible port and not one that is unheard of. If the allusion to ‘on the morrow’ is correct then it would appear the port would necessarily be near London. However if this allusion to time span is used just as a construction to link the account, could this be the same place as the port of Ruminella which we will investigate shortly. If Paul had left Armorica or Brittany it is possible he made landfall where the Holy Family had settled.

Acts 29:9 "And on the morrow he came and stood upon Mount Lud; and the people thronged at the gate and assembled in the Broadway.  He preached Christ unto them, and many believed the word and the testimony of Jesus.

This is the exact location where St Paul's Cathedral stands today at Ludgate hill in London.

Acts 29:10 "And at even the Holy Ghost fell upon Paul, and he prophesied, saying, Behold in the last days the God of Peace shall dwell in the cities, and the inhabitants thereof shall be numbered; and in the seventh numbering of the people, their eyes shall be opened, and the glory of their inheritance shine forth before them. And nations shall come up to worship on the Mount that testifieth the patience and long suffering of a servant of the Lord."

The "seventh numbering", is what we have elucidated earlier as the beginning of the period of the last thousand years i.e the present era. That is to say that it refers to the same time as we have understood to be Jehosaphat or the same day or period that Melkin refers to, as the uncovering of the tomb of Joseph and Jesus. This period is the discovery of the trickery that the Roman religion has perpetrated by wiping out the evidence of Britain’s primacy to the Church of Jesus. It is the time of realisation that for the last 2000 years the Roman religion has made Britain’s real history into unbelievable legends and myths, accounted only today as stories and romances.

 At the discovery of the Tonb at Burgh Island, this last chapter is concurring with Melkin’s prophecy in that the Nations of the world will be presented with the evidence of the murder and long suffering of a servant of the Lord bringing about a global cognitive shift in consciousness. How is it that Melkin concurs with an erased chapter of the Acts that confirms not only Paul’s visit to Britain, but highlights how within a short period after the crucifixion, the greatest of the apostles was eager to come to the country where the family members of Jesus were said to have arrived also.

Acts 29:11 "And in the latter days new tidings of the Gospel shall issue forth out of Jerusalem, and the hearts of the people shall rejoice, and behold, fountains shall be opened, and there shall be no more plague."

The New tidings of the Good News that are to issue forth out of Jerusalem are not going to issue from a Middle Eastern Jerusalem, but from the New Jerusalem of Blake’s understanding. The same concept was held by Melkin but instead of fountains it was,’ From then on those who dwell in that noble Island shall lack neither water nor the dew of heaven. A long time before the Day of Judgment in Josaphat; open shall these things be and told to the living’.

Acts 29:12 "In those days there shall be wars and rumours of wars; and a king shall rise up, and his sword shall be for the healing of the nations, and his peace making shall abide, and the glory of his kingdom a wonder among princes."

Acts 29:13 "And it came to pass that certain of the Druids came unto Paul privately, and showed by their rites and ceremonies they were descended from the Jews which escaped from bondage in the land of Egypt, and the apostle believed these things, and he gave them the kiss of peace."

Here we can see the confirmation of the British peoples heritage from Judah through Tamar as we have witnessed in our investigation of the first ‘tinners’ on the River Avon and the choice of Joseph of Arimathea to bury his son on the island of Sarras or island of Zarah.

Acts 29:14 "And Paul abode in his lodging three months confirming in the faith and preaching Christ continually."

Here we hear that Paul spent three months proselytising a nation ripe to accept the teachings of Jesus. This made much the easier if we are correct in our assumption that Jesus’ understanding of the Law was indeed obtained in Britain.

Acts 29:15 "And after these things Paul and his brethern departed from Raphinus, and sailed unto Atium in Gaul.

"Gaul" as we know is in France but is Atium Avranche and is the port of Raphinus the same as the port of Ruminella. If this last chapter of Acts had an ulterior motive such as proving that St.Paul came to Britain …… it would have most probably used names that were widely known as being distinguishable. The very fact that the place names seem so unknown and matter of fact helps their credibility in being genuine and not some part of a fabricated account. This is the reason the Roman Church has eradicated every reference to Paul’s visit to Britain…… it adds credence to the thesis uncovered in this book of Britain’s connection to the Holy Family.

Acts 29:16 "And Paul preached in the Roman garrisons and among the people, exhorting all men to repent and confess their sins."

Acts 29:17 "And there came to him certain of the Belgae to enquire of him of the new doctrine, and of the man Jesus; and Paul opened his heart unto them, and told them all things that had befallen him, how be it that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; and they departed, pondering among themselves upon the things which they had heard."

Belgae we can assume is present day Belgium.

Acts 29:18 "And after much preaching and toil Paul and his fellow labourers passed into Helvetia, and came unto Mount Pontius Pilate, where he who condemned the Lord Jesus dashed himself down headlong, and so miserably perished."

After arriving in France traveling through Belgium and Helvetia (Switzerland). The writer seems to think that Pontius Pilate found death in Switzerland.  This evidence is unexpected if indeed the writer has an ulterior motive and seems inconsequential as part of a persuasive polemical ploy as a proof of a visit by Paul. This information, unheard of elsewhere except through Eusebius, would make the rest of his supposed fabrication seem less credible.  Eusebius, in his ‘Historia Ecclesiae’ ii: 7 quotes some early apocryphal accounts for which he gives no source which relate that Pilate met with misfortune in Caligula’s reign 37–41 and  was exiled to Gaul and eventually committed suicide there in Vienne where a monument  called Pilate's tomb can still be seen.

 

Acts 29:19 "And immediately a torrent gushed out of the mountain and washed his body, broken in pieces into a lake."

Acts 29:20 "And Paul stretched forth his hands upon the water, and prayed unto the Lord, saying, O Lord God give a sign unto all nations that here Pontius Pilate, which condemned thine only begotten Son, plunged headlong into the pit."

Acts 29:21 "And while Paul was yet speaking, behold there came a great earthquake, and the face of the waters was changed, and the form of the lake like unto the Son of Man hanging in the agony upon the cross."

Acts 29:22 "And a voice came out of heaven saying, Even Pilate hath escaped the wrath to come, for he washed his hands before the multitude at the blood-shedding of the Lord Jesus."

Acts 29:23 "When therefore, Paul and those that were with him saw the earthquake, and heard the voice of the angel, they glorified God, and were mightily strengthened in spirit."

Acts 29:24 "And they journeyed and came to Mount Julius, where stood two pillars, one on the right hand and one on the left hand, erected by Caesar Augustus."

Paul then travels to "Mount Julius" (the Julian Alps between Italy and Austria) then onto Illyricum, on his way to Macedonia and Asia, from where he wrote the Pastoral letters to Timothy and Titus.

Acts 29:25 "And Paul, filled with the Holy Ghost, stood up between the two pillars, saying Men and brethren, these stones which ye see this day shall testify of my journey hence; and verily I say, they shall remain until the out pouring of the spirit upon all nations, neither shall the way be hindered throughout all generation."

Acts 29:26 "And they went forth and came unto Illyricum, intending to go by Macedonia into Asia, and grace was found in all the churches; and they prospered and had peace. Amen."

 

The End

Glossary of references

A problematic source of organic contamination of Linen, by H.E Gove, S.J.Mattingly, A.R David, L.A Garza-Valdez.

Devon Archeological Society proceedings, an iron age linch pin from loddiswell, no 60 2002

Devon Archeological Society proceedings,The ingots from Bigbury bay no 53 1995

Leonardo's Madonna of the Yarnwinder: in the second of two articles on Leonardo da Vinci, Larry J. Feinberg

Carley, James P., The Chronicle of Glastonbury Abbey, Boydell press

Thorpe, Lewis, trans., Geoffrey of Monmouth: The History of the Kings of Britain, Penguin Books, 1966.

Two Glastonbury Legends: King Arthur and St. Joseph of Arimathea (1926 J.Armitage Robinson) Kessinger legacy reprints.

From Ritual to Romance by Miss Jesse Laidlaw Weston published in 1920 by Cambridge University Press, London.

Pyramid and the Grail by Michael Becket.

Great White Palace by Tony Porter.

Ictis disentangled and the British tin trade, Oxford journal of archaeology. C. F. C Hawkes 1984.

 Diodorus Siculus Bibliotheca Historica.

The origin of the shroud of Turin from the near east as evidenced by plant images and by pollen grains by Dr. Avinoam Danin.

The Templar Papers: Ancient Mysteries, Secret Societies, and the Holy Grail By Oddvar Olsen.

Elizabeth Jenkins, The Mysteries of King Arthur.

Rivers of Life: Or Sources and Streams of the Faiths of Man in All Lands  By J. G. R. Forlong.

Max Muller Chips from a German Workshop (1867–75, 5vols).

The Revelatio Ecclesiae de Sancti Michaelis and the Mediterranean Origins of Mont St.-Michel. John Charles Arnold.  

Joseph of Aramathie, Otherwise called the Romance of the Seint Graal or Holy Grail, by Reverend Walter W. Skeat.

 Figure 78 The Island of Avallon from the Prophecy of Melkin, where Joseph of Arimathea, King Arthur and the Holy Grail lay buried.

Figure 1 Showing the St. Michael’s Ley Line.

Figure 1a Showing Stonehenge one of the nodal points on the Ley system.

Figure 1b Showing  the two stone circles in Cornwall called The Hurlers situated on the Neolithic St. Michael Ley line

Figure 2 Showing Glastonbury Tor situated on the St. Michael Ley line, one of many Hill top St. Michael dedicated sites.

Figure 3 Showing the St. Michael church Burrow Mump on the St. Michael Ley line.

Figure 4 Showing the Redruth Carn Brea which had a 13th century St. Michael chapel on it, latterly turned into a castle which lies exactly upon the rhumb line of the St. Michael Ley Line.

Figure 5 Showing the Lyonesse line from Chapel Carn Brea through St.Michael’s Mount then through Burgh Island to Roquetoire in France.

Figure 6 Showing the Ley line that runs north at 90° from the Lyonesse line, tangential to Old Sarum, Stonehenge, Silbury hill and Avebury.

Figure 6a Showing the large oval earthworks mound of Old Sarum with evidence of human habitation since 3000 BC.

Figure 7 Showing the radius connecting the Perpetual Choirs with that of Whitelow Cairn.

Figure 8 Showing the Pyramid form on the British landscape.

Figure 9 Showing St Michael’s Mount, Marazion, and the rocky foreshore, on which the foreign trading vessels were supposed to land at all states of the tide.

Figure 10 Showing the Island of Ictis as it appeared in 1918 but relatively unchanged since Pytheas first visited.

Figure 10a Showing the tin Valley of the Avon, high above Ictis on Southern Dartmoor.

Figure 10b Showing the white water at the head of the river Erm caused by West Mary’s rocks which the Phonecian pilot ran his vessel onto and the proximity of these rocks to the Fabled Island of Ictis situated in Bigbury Bay.

Figure 11 showing the anchorage at Bantham.

Figure 12 showing the approaches to mouth of the river Avon.

Figure 12a showing the dam wall with protruding stones  designed to anchor the cross wall. These large stones were anchored into the side wall to create a fixing point for the dam that is found next to the Bronze age dwellings at Shipley Bridge.

Figure 12b Showing St. Michael’s Brent Knoll

Figure 13. Showing the cross found in king Arthur’s grave shown in the 1607 edition of Camden’s Britannica.

Figure 14 Showing the St. Michael Ley lines pointing out St. Michael’s at Harnhill and the radius from which describes the Pyramid. It is from this construct that the Jewish six pointed star is created.

Figure 15 Showing the tympanum over the door of St. Michael’s church Harnhill and a depiction of St. Michael slaying the Dragon.

Figure 18 Showing the radius from St. Michael’s rock as coinciding with the Cheops pyramid.

Figure 19 Showing the initial Perpetual Choir circumference along with the two Harnhill cicumferences’, The design described on the Templar Grand masters Ring.

Figure 20 Showing the remains of Glastonbury Abbey and King Arthur’s supposed resting place in the foreground marked by the plaque seen in figure 21.

Figure 21 Showing the plaque in the ruins of Glastonbury Abbey today still insistent that Arthur is buried beneath. The situation of the plaque is shown in figure20

Figure 21a Showing the Ley line from Avalon to Harnhill, where it crosses the St. Michael Ley line at Glastonbury Tor.

Figure 22 Showing the folly tower where there once stood a chapel dedicated to St.Michael.

Figure 22a Showing the folly tower, built in 1760 which now occupies the hill-top, known as St Michael's tower.  It stands on Mons Acutus which first had a wooden clamshell fort with motte & bailey later replaced by a stone castle. A church or chapel dedicated to St Michael later replaced the castle of which all sign has disappeared although the stone in figure 56 was found at the site. 

Figure 23 Showing the Joseph line running through Montecute from Avebury to Burgh Island which is precisely 104 Nautical miles.

Figure 24 Showing the Joseph line tangentially touching St. Michael’s hill Montecute. The Joseph line forming the acute angle of 13° at Avebury between the St. Michael line and Mons Acutus (montecute)

Figure 24a Showing the exemplified three sides of the right angle triangle giving 12.84 degrees

Figure 25 Showing the 13° formed between the St. Michael Ley line and the Joseph Line that Bifurcate at Avebury.

Figure 25a Edward Burne Jones’s Tapestry of ‘The Failure of Sir Gawaine & Sir Uwaine at the Ruined Chapel’ showing St. Michael the Archangel as the one entering into the Grail chamber to ask the fabled Question; Who does the Grail serve?

Figure 25b Showing the St. Michael Ley line the Joseph line relative to Ictis and the Wreck sites better known as the Island of Avalon.

Figure 26 Showing Silbury Hill where archaeologists calculate that Silbury Hill was built about 2500 BC  and that it took 18 million man-hours, or 500 men working for 15 years.

Figure 27 Showing the Great pyramid of Cheops overlaid on the British landscape with the alignment to Cheops from the air shaft.

Figure 28 Showing the Great circle route from Avebury to the Great pyramid of Cheops at Latitude 30°.

Figure 29 Showing the St. Michael alignments from Skellig Michael.

Figure 30 Showing the airshaft alignments and the underground passage to the Island of Sarras.

Figure 31 Showing Avebury stone Circle within which the St. Michael and the Joseph line Bifurcate according with Melkin’s prophecy.

Figure 32 Showing the Buccleuch version of The Madonna of the Yarnwinder. The baby Jesus is pointing to Avalon

Figure 33 Shows the London version of the ‘Virgin and the rocks’

Figure 34 Showing the same vertical rock formation and fallen rocks, as seen in both versions of the ‘Virgin and the rocks’ paintings.

Figure 35 The only known photo of the cave in 1925 depicted to the left of both the London and Paris versions of the Virgin and the rocks.

Figure 36 Showing the bricked up wall of the cave from the seaward side. shown in both versions of  the Virgin and the rocks.

Figure 37 Showing the cave from the Mermaid pool now acting as a water retainer for the tidal pool.

FIG 38 The cave before deep construction of Mermaid pool circa 1930

Figure 39 Showing Burgh Island to the left with the ‘Great white palace’ above the tidal causeway but also looking through Thurlestone rock at the large rock off Bantham, forming the same image as in the Virgin and the rocks.

Figure 40 Showing the similarity of perspective and rock formation as seen in the Buccleuch version.

Figure 40a Showing the Lansdowne version of the Yarnwinder with the Aveton Gifford tidal road and bridge on the river Avon leading downstream to Avalon.

Figure 40b Showing the similarity of perspective and rock formation as seen in the Buccleuch

Figure 41 Showing the Tidal road and bridge as seen in the Lansdowne Version.

Figure 42 Showing the bridge, and tidal road running alongside the river.

Figure 43 showing by infrared reflectography, the finger that has been left out of the final version of the Lansdowne painting as seen in figure 44

Figure 44 Showing the disappearance of the middle finger that is shown exaggeratedly in the Buccleuch version and even more so in the private version with the garden scene as a bckground.

Figure 44a Showing the merged paintings of the Lansdowne and Buccleuch versions exactly replicating  the perspective of their geographical locations i.e the relational distance of the river Avon and Bantham to Burgh Island. This has been roughly Photoshopped to show the small corrections necessary to locate Avalon.

Figure 44b Showing the similar perspective and relational proportions of the two merged backgrounds as shown by Google Earth.  Note the rotational shift of the Yarnwinder Stem that subliminally indicates the Joseph line as shown here in the landscape that stops at Avalon, 104 miles from Avebury.

Figure 44c Showing the word Avalonis written with jumbled letters in true Leonardo code, just as a random generated spam blocker twists the alphabet to ensure human rather than robotic recognition.

Figure 45 Showing the perspective of the Buccleuch version of the Island of Avalon

Figure 46 showing the view of the river Avon with the crenulations of the shortened church tower in the foreground; the Joseph Ley line running over the hill in the background of the photo along the river to Burgh Island.

Figure 47a Showing an angle of 26.5°, the angle created between the spindles on the Lansdowne version. 

Figure 47b Showing the angle of 21.5° created by the spindles of the Buccleuch version of the Yarnwinder, the same angle as between the St. Michael’s Ley line and the Lyonesse line as shown in figure 23.

Figure47c Showing the view down the Avon river as it appears in the Lansdowne version of the Yarnwinder with the tidal road on the right following the river toward Ictis.

Figure48 Showing on the left the Sepia coloured shroud impregnated with Cedar oil residue giving a Negative image as a positive product  and on the right the photographic image, the positive of the naturally formed negative.

Figure 48a Showing the photographed image of Jesus on the Turin Shroud.

Figure 48b The Pray Codex, showing the similarity of repose of the body of Jesus as being similar to the image formed on the Shroud.

Figure 49 Showing a chart of the entrance between the sand flats at low tide and the proximity of Bantham harbour to Avalon.

Figure 50 Showing the silted harbour where the Treasure ships moored in Bantham harbour.

Figure 51 Showing the tidal road which was the ancient track-way from the moors to Ictis and after rising up to the village of Bigbury, it then passes through the ancient settlement of Folly hill above Bigury on Sea.

Figure 52 Showing the peaceful Island of Ictis as it is today.

Figure 53 Showing the turning room for a sizable craft circa 1930  before the silting of Bigbury anchorage due to the construction of the Avon dam. This illustrates the ample depth and room for navigating and mooring the Templar ships, which were probably similar to a French ship of the era.

Figure 54 showing the old Bantham tin trading port which has now become more silted since the Avon dam was built

Figure55 Showing the St. Michael chapel at Roche Rock in Cornwall, equidistant from the St.Michael Ley line and the Harnhill line.

Figure56 Shows a cut and shaped stone from the old St.Michael chapel.  This honey-gold Ham Hill stone, cut from the Ham hill quarry was found in the undergrowth not far from the summit on the eastern side of St. Michael’s hill. This forgotten stone is the only surviving evidence of the previously removed chapel

Figure 57 Showing a view from ‘Bigbury on Sea’ of Pytheas’s peninsula just before the tide covers the causeway pictured in 1920.

Figure 58, showing the bustling causeway today at low tide, on which the cart loads of tin described by Pytheas, were unloaded on to vessels dried out on the beach.

Figure 59 Showing the Tidal road up to Aveton Gifford with the Serpentine river flowing down to Burgh Island as it is depicted in Leonardo’s ‘Yarnwinder’ painting

Figure 60 Showing the remains of three round Tinner’s huts in the foreground, which have nearly been submerged by the Avon dam. The picture is taken from the dam wall looking up the valley toward the rivers source on Dartmoor.

Figure 60a Showing ‘Riders Rings’ a Bronze age hut enclosure with the remains of several huts and the tin producing Valley in the background.

Figure 61 Showing a photograph of Burgh Island in 1904 taken from Bantham showing the same view as depicted in Leonardo’s painting with only the Pilchard Inn visible.

Figure 62 Showing the Huer’s hut on the top of Burgh Island. When the first hotel was built, the hut had been a tea room so that walkers could rest there.

Figure 63 Shows the protected landfall at Ictis for visiting foreign trading vessels to beach in safety, on the eastern side of the causeway.

Figure 64 showing the impracticality of arriving to pick up tin on a rocky foreshore on the tidal causeway of St. Michael’s mount.

Figure 65 Showing the entrance to the Iron age hill fort on Bolt tail with the Island of Ictis in the foreground. The Burgh Island hotel is to the right of the Island and the distant hill on the right of the picture is the tin producing area of Southern  Dartmoor.

Figure 66 Showing a view from the Folly hill community down over Bantham harbour. Also showing the ‘Long Stone’ to the right.

Figure 66a Showing the view from the spot where the Linch Pin was found leading down to Hatch Bridge and the Aveton Gifford tidal road that leads out to Ictis.

Figure 66b Showing signs of wear from ancient cart tracks running along the shore a few meters further on from the end of the present tidal road

Figure 67 Shows the perfect landfall of Ictis for any foreign trading vessel at all states of the tide by comparison with the rocky foreshore of St. Michael’s Mount.

Figure 67a Showing the entrance to the Erm estuary looking west at mid tide in a southerly wind, where the Phonecian captain’s cargo of tin ingots were found just north of West Mary’s rocks just inshore of the breaking reef.

Figure 67b Showing the entrance to the Erm estuary at Low tide where the tin ingots were found from the Phoenician trading ship, just inshore from where the swell is seen, caused by the two rocks.

Figure 68 Showing the mouth of the river Avon flowing out toward Avalon with a view from Folly hill.

Figure 69 showing the St. Michael Church at Brent Tor, one of the remotest churches in Britain and one mile from the St. Michael Ley line.

Figure 69a Showing the Sacred Island, where Joseph of Arimathea chose to entomb his nephew and where his own relics rest.  It is Melkin and the Prophets who show that 2000 years afterward the discovery of their Tomb will start the final 1000 year era.

Figure 70 Showing a strong Southerly wind at high tide but still small boats can land close to land.

Figure 71 Showing St. Michael’s mount and the difficult approach that foreign tin trading vessels would have had, if this had been the Fabled Island of Ictis.

Figure 72 Showing the calm at high tide in the lee of Ictis

Figure 73 Showing Mont-Saint-Michel near Avranche in Normandy, the Island that is intimately connected with St. Michael’s Mount in Cornwall and the Sacred Isle of Avalon with its associations with St. Michael.

Longitude and Latitude co-ordinates

1)Carn les Boel                                  51°03’02N 5°41’36W

2)Chapel Carn Brea                            50°05’54N 5°39’03W

3) St. Michael’s Mount                        50°07’02N 5°28’38W

4)Burgh Island                                   50°16’44N 3°54’03W

5)Roquetoire                                      50°41’09N 2°20’24E

6)Lyonesse right angle                       50°27’38 81”N 1 40’48 72”W

7)Whitelow Cairn                                53°38’33N 2°17’47W

8) Intersect Point Harnhill                   51°41’48N 1°54’33W

9) Avebury                                         51°25’42N 1°51’21W

10) Silbury Hill                                    51°24’56N 1°51’26W

11) Old Sarum                                    51°05’35N 1°48’15W

12) Stonehenge                                  51°10’43N 1°49’31W

13) Bluehenge                                    51°10’17N 1°47’58W

14)St.Michael’s hill Montacute             50°57’02N 2°43’19W

15) Glastonbury Tor                            51°08’40N 2°41’55W

16) Marlbrook                                     52°21’56N 2°02’19W

17) Bangor Is y Coed                          53°00’30N 2°55’37W

18) Llantwit Major                               51°25’50N 3°28’22W

19) St. Micheal’s Brent Knoll                51°15’07N 2°57’13W

20) St. Michael’s Burrow Mump            51°04’13N 2°54’57W

21)  St. Michael’s Brent Tor                  50°36’12N 4°09’44W

22) The Hurlers                                   50°30’58N 4°27’29W

23)  St. Michael’s Roche rock                50°24’07N 4°49’41W

24) St. Michael’s Carn Brea Redruth     50°13’20N 5°14’41W

25) The Blind Fiddler                            50°05’52N 5°36’05W

26) Dragon Hill Uffington horse            51°34’46N 1°34’13W

27) Hopton on Sea                               52°32’16N 1°43’48E

Copyright © 2011 Michael Goldsworthy

The moral right of the author has been asserted.

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study,

or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents

Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in

any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the

publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with

the terms of licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Enquiries

concerning reproduction outside those terms should be sent to the publishers.

Matador

Troubador Publishing Ltd

9 Priory Business Park

Wistow Road

Kibworth

Leicester LE8 0RX, UK

Tel: 0116 279 2299

Email: books@troubador.co.uk

Web: www.troubador.co.uk/matador

ISBN 9781780883007

A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library