King Arthur at Glastonbury

Chapter 6
King Arthur’s connection to the Pyramids at Glastonbury and the relation of those pyramids with the St. Michael ley line.
The mythical exploits of King Arthur and the legend of Joseph of Arimathea seem to have been perpetuated by Glastonbury and the Grail romances and Melkin, the monk who so little is known about is the source. The mythical Island of Avalon has its presence interwoven into many forms of folklore, whether it be the Grail Romances from France, Arthurian legend in Britain, or even in association with Joseph of Arimathea. These stories have now been so interwoven over time, that it is difficult to divine their original source and many people today regard them as purely fictional. There is virtually no consensus of opinion when it comes to the subject of King Arthur, but many also think that he did live in a period between 450 and 650 A.D. and is an historical figure.
The name Arthur is extremely rare in Welsh writings as a Welsh name and as we will try to elucidate, King Arthur's connections seem to be based upon a Cornish and Devonian background. However, the Welsh, mainly through the writings of Geoffrey of Monmouth and the Triads spread his fame abroad from a Welsh perspective. Arthur is portrayed as having battles against native Britons and as being the Pen-Dragon of a consolidated force against the Saxon invaders. Arthur's Cornish heritage is never very far, but the Welsh chroniclers by Celtic association appear to have made him into a more national figure as witnessed in this Welsh triad:

Three Dishonoured Men who were in the Island of Britain: One of them: Afarwy son of Lludd son of Beli. He first summoned Julius Caesar and the men of Rome to this Island, and he caused the payment of three thousand pounds in money as tribute from this Island every year, because of a quarrel with Caswallawn his uncle. And the second is Gwrtheyrn [Vortigern] the Thin, who first gave land to the Saxons in this Island, and was the first to enter into an alliance with them. He caused the death of Custennin the Younger, son of Custennin the Blessed, by his treachery, and exiled the two brothers Emrys Wledig and Uthur Penndragon from this Island to Armorica, and deceitfully took the crown and the kingdom into his own possession. And in the end Uthur and Emrys burned Gwrtheyrn in Castell Gwerthrynyawn beside the Wye, in a single conflagration to avenge their brother. The third and worst was Medrawd (Mordred), when Arthur left with him the government of the Island of Britain, at the same time when he himself went across the sea to oppose Lles [Lucius], emperor of Rome, who had dispatched messengers to Arthur in Caerleon to demand (payment of) tribute to him and to the men of Rome, from this Island, in the measure that it had been paid (from the time of) Caswallawn son of Beli until the time of Custennin the Blessed, Arthur's grandfather. This is the answer that Arthur gave to the emperor's messengers: that the men of Rome had no greater claim to tribute from the men of this Island, than the men of the Island of Britain had from them. For Bran son of Dyfnwal and Custennin son of Elen had been emperors in Rome, and they were two men of this Island. Arthur mustered the most select warriors of his kingdom and led them across the sea against the emperor. And they met beyond the mountain of Mynneu [the Alps], and an untold number was slain on each side that day. And in the end Arthur encountered the emperor, and Arthur slew him. And Arthur's best men were slain there. When Medrawd heard that Arthur's host was dispersed, he turned against Arthur, and the Saxons and the Picts and the Scots united with him to hold this Island against Arthur. And when Arthur heard that, he turned back with all that had survived of his army, and succeeded by violence in landing on this Island in opposition to Medrawd. And then there took place the Battle of Camlan between Arthur and Medrawd, and was himself wounded to death. And from that (wound) he died, and was buried in a hall on the Island of Afallach.

The one thing that can be agreed upon is Arthur's association with the Isle of Avalon or Affalach, but it is the term ‘Hall’ that seems out of place at the end of this last passage. Does the vault that the miners hewed on Ictis resemble a chamber more precisely? It is worth pointing out regarding the dating of Arthur that Lucius is fictional appearing first in Geoffrey of Monmouth's ‘Historia Regum Britanniae’.Lucius appears in later literature such as Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur, and the Alliterative Morte Arthure, and a Roman Emperor defeated by King Arthur appears in French Arthurian literature and also in the Vulgate Cycle. As we will cover, the source of this French material and the British sources derive from one man, Melkin, but the French and British literature was separated for a period of about 3-4 hundred years before the wildly embellished French Grail romances met back up with the same traditions that existed in Britain . Because these two sources were separated but concur about Arthur living in a period of Roman and Saxon involvement we can assume that without dating specifically, both sources are not based upon fiction but more probably are the product of an historical account that has been romanticized.

Again John of Glastonbury is quoted here saying; ‘This passage is found among the deeds of the Glorious King Arthur’: the book of the deeds of the glorious King Arthur bears witness, that the noble decurion Joseph of Arimathea came to Great Britain, which is now called England, along with his son Josephes and many others, and that there they ended their lives. This is found in the portion of the book dealing with the search carried out by the companions of the round table for an illustrious knight called Lancelot du Lac, that is, in the part of the book where a hermit explains to Gawain the mystery of a fountain, which keeps changing taste and colour; in the same place it is also written that the miracle will not end until a great lion comes whose neck is bound in heavy chains. It is also reported practically at the beginning of the quest for the vessel, which is there called the Holy Grail, where the White Knight explains to Galahad, son of Lancelot, the mystery of a miraculous shield which he enjoins him to carry and which no one else can bear, even for a day, without grave loss.’

We must discover the truths behind the fabric of the various tales, since the legends have stretched over 2000 years. Accounts of King Arthur and associated Knights run concurrently with Joseph of Arimathea who lived 500 years previously, but also involving Knights from the crusade era, shows that what might have been an historical account has lost all chronology. The Troubadours of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries have embellished upon legend from the Dark ages and they have distorted historical fact so that the time frames in which the stories are related, only make less credible, what once was a true account. These might include Mary Magdalene's passage through France , the arrival at Glastonbury of Joseph of Arimathea, the legends of King Arthur and Merlin, all appearing in a random time frame from the days of Joseph of Arimathea, coinciding with tales of questing knights in search of an elusive Grail. All these combined to make a wondrous source material for the artful troubadours which also seem to have involved characters of courtly renown out of flattery.

Basically what seems to be the solution is that Joseph arrived in Britain at Avalon with the Grail (Jesus' body) and the Grail accounts of Perceval Galaad and Lancelot are based on historical accounts of the 'Keepers of the Grail' up until the time of King Arthur who was the last in this bloodline. It can be seen that Melkin who wrote the Grail book also incorporated occult information alongside an historical basis that involves a spiritual quest. The location of Avalon was lost in the mists of time and Joseph who originally landed in Devon left the Grail on Avalon and went to proselytise and probably did have an association with the Glastonbury church.
However, Melkin the Prophet from the British tradition, predicts the discovery of Joseph of Arimathea’s tomb and how it will be found untouched, together with predictions of visiting pilgrims on a global scale, due to the wondrous miracles done at the Island of Avalon, all add to the aura of intrigue. Some of this material however, can be accounted as esoteric and occult knowledge disseminated circa 600 -700AD, and relates in part, to true historical fact compiled by Melkin. Melkin, who as we shall discover named the Island Avalon after what he had witnessed there at the death of King Arthur also witnessed other astounding revelations. His knowledge of the arrival of the early Christians was recorded in ancient manuscripts and he transcribed this history including events that had transpired in the intervening years up until Arthur’s death in what became known as the book of the Grail.

Melkin’s prophesy, as we shall uncover, is the root source for the perpetuation of the Joseph legend at Glastonbury, but his other writings were to have an even greater effect. The account that went to France as an original latin text as the book of the Grail, became the source information known as the ‘Matière de Bretagne’. The body of material that the French refer to as ‘The Matter of Britain’ coincides with subject matter and material contained in Melkin’s prophecy about Joseph, which as we saw earlier, was written in almost untranslatable Latin, but is most commonly translated thus:

The Isle of Avalon, greedy for the death of pagans, more than the rest of the world, for the entombment of them all, decorated beyond all others by the spheres of portentous prophecy. In the future, adorned shall it be by them that praise the Most High.Abbadare mighty in Saphat, noblest of pagans, has found sleep with 104 other knights there. Among these Joseph of Arimathea has found perpetual sleep in a marble tomb, and he lies on a two forked line next to the southern angle of an oratory, where wattle is prepared above the mighty maiden and where the aforesaid Thirteen spheres rest. Joseph has with him in his sarcophagus two vessels, white and silver, filled with the blood and sweat of the prophet Jesus.When his tomb is discovered, it will be seen whole and untouched and will be open to the whole world. 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.

Although this prophecy does not mention Glastonbury, much of the purport of the prophecy has been conferred on Glastonbury. We will investigate how this has transpired later by the conscious fraud of the Glastonbury monks as we find that Glastonbury has associated itself with Melkin’s prophecy falsely and also fraudulently uncovered the bones of King Arthur so that they may be thought of as being synonymous with Avalon. Before we do this let us see how Glastonbury ancient past does fit into the geometrical puzzle that seems to have been discreetly hidden by churches dedicated to St. Michael.

Glastonbury lays upon the St. Michael Ley line also known as the ‘Dragon line’ by association with St. Michael the dragon slayer, along with its dowsed serpentine nature. It is here on this line in connection with King Arthur’s supposed burial site, we hear mention of two pyramids that were exterior to the old church in Glastonbury, before it burnt down. There is even mention of the height of the two pyramids, one being 18 feet high and the other 26 feet high. One of the pyramids, between which King Arthur was supposed to have been buried, had inscribed upon it, place names. Montacute, Brent Knoll, and Glastonbury which are all prominent hill sites which have, or have had in the past, churches dedicated to St. Michael, built upon them.

Giraldus Cambrensis in 1194 AD records that the tomb of King Arthur was found in 1191 between two "stone pyramids in the holy cemetery dedicated by St. Dunstan". Giraldus is clearly referring to the two stone pyramids that were reported by William of Malmesbury as being located a few feet from the old wattle church. An inscribed lead cross was said to have been found in Arthur’s uncovered grave, with the words Hic iacet sepultus inclitus rex Arturius in insula Avalonia; ‘Here lies interred King Arthur in the island of Avalon’. Clearly, by finding King Arthur’s body which was reputed to be buried in the Isle of Avalon…… it would naturally confirm the location of Avalon as Glastonbury especially if the body were found at Glastonbury. Combining that with a corpse with an inscription stating ‘here lies King Arthur’, would seem to eliminate all doubt. It is here that Glastonbury has its biggest problem, because once decoded..... Melkin’s geometrical instructions are part of a puzzle in the form of a Prophecy and these actually lead to Burgh Island, The Avallonis to which Melkin is showing us.

 

Figure 12b  Showing St. Michael’s church Brent Knoll situated on the St. Michael’s Mount, Marazion to Harnhill Ley line. This Church is the only one out of the ‘marker’ churches set out by the Templars not to be built on a summit, or in this case the Knoll.

Although the prophecy, written by Melkin around the sixth to seventh century was somewhat untranslatable; by implication, it was inferred in that text that Joseph of Arimathea was buried in the Isle of Avalon. The Grail romances also make the same claim for King Arthur, but even before they appeared, much of the Arthurian and Joseph material was commonly known in folklore, much of this stemming from the manuscripts that Glastonbury chroniclers attest that Melkin wrote. Joseph from an early time was renowned for building the first church at Glastonbury and was acknowledged to have a connection with the tin trade in Cornwall. Arthur’s name as a King that fought Saxons would have been widely known although not greatly recorded except in manuscripts written by Melkin left in Britain.

Melkin wrote his attested book on ‘Arthur and the Round Table’ after Arthur’s death,(to have knowledge that Arthur is buried in Avalon), but the fact that Joseph was known to be buried in a place called Avalon before Melkin wrote…… we are not able to establish, because as we will get to shortly, Melkin knew the Island used to be called Ictis. However, the village on the river Avon which flows to Avalon, was known as Aveton before the Norman conquest, but we have no reference as to when it took this name……so the island does seem to have been named Avalon by Melkin. Also as we shall find out later, this area was referred to as ‘Venn’ in the period between 700 and 1066 as seen in a charter by Edward the Confessor. Since the location of Avalon remained a mystery to all except the 'illuminate' within the Templar organisation, we can only assume it was Melkin who named the Island, since he was the person who gives account of who is buried there.

Whether or not Arthur was widely acknowledged to be buried in the Isle of Avalon, prior to the proliferation of the Grail material is unknown but seems probable based upon the fact that it was Melkin who is responsible for the source from which Geoffrey of Monmouth proclaims Athur’s burial place.
We cannot be sure of the name of that Island at that date when Melkin wrote, but as will become clear Melkin knew it was the old Ictis of the Greek and Latin chroniclers. He would hardly have created a puzzle naming the Island of Avallonis as the island in which Joseph and Arthur were buried, if the name of that Island had that particular appellation at that time. This would negate the purport of the riddle and for this reason we can assume that it was Melkin who is responsible for the name Avalon.

By the twelfth century, two of the greatest personages in ancient British history, Arthur and Joseph, are confirmed to lie in the same location at Avalon. Glastonbury's reputation however rested on rumour with neither tomb to exhibit, and proof was necessary to encourage pilgrims to come to the Abbey.
William of Malmesbury and Geoffrey of Monmouth in their respective writings as we have mentioned do not make a connection between Avalon and Glastonbury, so evidently, at the time that they wrote, no propaganda was yet employed in Glastonbury. Glastonbury may well have had the Joseph tradition from antiquity but the Venerable Bede who died in 735 who (if Glastonbury had had such a famed heritage), he omitted to mention it and strangely says nothing about Glastonbury itself. William of Malmesbury however who only refers to Joseph as a report from a third party says in his Gesta Pontificum, circa 1125 that the monastery was founded by the Saxon king Ine (688-726) but then later ‘becomes convinced’ that the monastery had been founded back in the Roman era. It is for this reason I believe he and Henry Blois may have been the first to sow the seed that Glastonbury’s 'Joseph tradition' is from Antiquity. It can be seen in Williams case any mention of Joseph is later interpolation. Geoffrey of Monmouth, Gildas and Nennius had all given an account of King Arthur and his battles and there was generally a resurgence of interest in the British hero that also brought fresh reminders of the Isle of Avalon into popular consciousness at the advent and proliferation of the Grail materials arrival in Britain. It was circa 1190 A.D that Glastonbury as an institution came up with the idea to establish unequivocally the location of the Isle of Avalon as Glastonbury.

It is from extracts in William of Malmesbury’s ‘Gesta Regnum’ (copied into the margin), John of Glastonbury and the Magna Tabula, that we hear of Melkin’s prophecy, which speaks of the Isle of Avalon. The monks would have considered that if they were to unearth Joseph of Arimathea, naturally there would have to be miracles, to coincide with Melkin’s prophecy. The Prophecy foretells of this, but to produce the ‘duo fassula’ (the vessel synonymous with the Holy Grail) might prove difficult, because no-one was quite sure of its form. Even the Glastonbury monks might have realized that a false representation of the Grail might be sacrilege. The Monks however would be attuned to that part of the prophecy that predicted ‘the whole world would be in attendance’ and this would be good for the Abbey coffers. The fallacious assumption of some commentators today that the Prophecy of Melkin is a 12th century fraud is based upon several erroneous assumptions which we shall get to shortly.

The real practical problem that Glastonbury Abbey had, if they were to fabricate a discovery of Joseph’s tomb, was that they would have to reveal the Holy Grail to the world, known then as the ‘duo fassula’ or the Graal and not even the monks were certain what the Holy Grail consisted of, so there could be later catastrophic ramifications if it then got discovered. If they unveiled Arthur however, the practical problems of having to produce a Grail like object could be overcome. They would still be able to confirm Glastonbury as the Isle of Avalon, conferring on their Abbey, the even greater honour of having Joseph of Arimathea buried within their grounds, even if he was never going to be located. However this was carried out..... it is doubtful that a grave was dug and then filled with bones and then dug up in the presence of invited onlookers. More likely.... is the reason we hear about the grave site being curtained and prepared...... to reveal an already prepared sarcophagus with cross and bones etc to the unsuspecting gullible witnesses.

Leland, who was an early writer partly responsible for the continuation of much of the Glastonbury polemicism, states that he actually held the cross found at Arthur’s grave, in his hands. However, as we shall find out, the fact that Leland had in his possession such a cross in no way adds credibility to the ruse created by the monks of Glastonbury. The monks at the abbey, unveiling the tomb and producing a cross does not prove that Arthur himself was buried there. After all who in their right mind would stipulate on the cross where the location was that later it was found in, (too much like stating the obvious). Its sole purpose is to locate Arthur in Avalon which vicariously locates Joseph there........ obviated by their eagerness in the epitaph to locate the tomb in the Isle of Avalon.
The Margam rendition has:
Hic iacet inclitus rex Arthuris sepultus in insula Avellonia
Ralph of coggeshall has:
Hic iacet inclitus rex Arturius in insula Avallonis
Gerald of Wales has:
Hic jacet sepultus inclitus rex Arthurus cum wennevira uxore sua secunda in insula Avallonis
In other accounts at Glastonbury
Hic jacet sepultus inclitus rex Arturius in insula Avallonia
The one abiding theme apart from the spelling of the Island is the insistence of the cross marking Glastonbury as Avallon……the one essential fact that confers on the Glastonbury institution a claim to be the burial site of Joseph.

The pyramids however, marking "King Arthur's Grave," are shown on a plan displayed at Glastonbury Abbey today, which also indicates the site of the shrine to which his remains and those of Guinevere’s were later relocated.
The Grail material in general relates that King Arthur, had troublesome relatives, the worst of whom was his sister Morgan Le Fey, and his nephew Mordred. Arthur’s sister wanted his throne for her lover, but Mordred, Arthur’s nephew, (or as some romances relate), his son, by his other sister Morgawse, usurped Arthur’s throne while he was off battling abroad. Whatever the family inter-relations..... Arthur while away has a usurper at work. Arthur returned and suffered serious injuries in a battle with Mordred to retake his throne, eventually killing Mordred, but King Arthur had been fatally wounded in the fight for his kingdom. It is said that he was taken to the Isle of Avalon where it was hoped that he would be healed from his wounds.

It is an important point to make that it was understood by the originator of this material, that the Island of Avalon must have been a place on which miracles took place. This concurs with the perception held by Melkin in his prophecy. What, it must be asked, would convey sanctity to such a place except a connection with Jesus or possibly Joseph of Arimathea? Arthur is said, as we have mentioned, to be buried in the Isle of Avalon and that someday he would return to his people. This brief prophetic suggestion was probably caused by the fact that no-one knew what happened to him or where he had been taken and stems from rumour created in the interim before Arthur was declared to be buried in Avalon by Melkin. This rumour still existed to the time when Thomas Malory tells us that 'some men say in many parts of England that King Arthur not dead, but had by the will of our Lord Jesus into another place, and men say that he shall come again, and shall win the Holy Crosse.'

The fact that a Grail source, originating supposedly in France and Melkin’s Prophecy from Britain, both confer on Avalon some miraculous status, would appear to suggest that there is a common understanding between these works. What exactly does it mean that Arthur would return to his people except that he was lost to them and no-one knew where his gravesite really was. When Joseph of Arimathea is uncovered, it will be discovered that Arthur is buried with him………then he will be returned to his people, but only one man could know of his whereabouts, the same person who says who else is buried also in the Island of Avalon, from having seen the tin vault and what it contained.
Let us assume for the moment that the Grail stories are based on elements of historical facts about Arthur and not everything in the Grail stories is fabricated. Arthur, whose reputed castle lay at Tintagel, would have been fighting near that location with Mordred, having just returned from abroad, suggesting this last battle took place down in Cornwall. Instead of thinking of Glastonbury as an island because Monks have duped us into thinking Glastonbury tor is synonymous with the Island it is far better to appeal to the topography in the grail stories themselves to accurately locate Avalon. Glastonbury neither has beaches where vessels can land,tides, a river close by or is surrounded by vales. Arthur was taken to the Isle of Avalon that is by the sea, as is attested in numerous places in our investigation. We may have a glimpse that this could not apply to Glastonbury but a real coastal island. Geoffrey of Monmouth says:
It was there we took Arthur after the battle of Camlan where he had been wounded, Barin thus was the steersman because of his knowledge of the seas and the stars of heaven. With him at the tiller of the ship, we arrived there with the prince; and Morgen received us with due honour. She put the king in her chamber on a golden bed, uncovered his wound with her noble hand and looked long at it. At length she said he could be cured if only he stayed with her a long while and accepted her treatment. We therefore happily committed the king to her care and spread our sails to favourable winds on our return journey.

Let us assert here, (as this point is relevant at the end of our investigation), that Camelot never existed. In fact in the Perlesvaus, as we will show, written by Henry Blois who is also not sure of its location, specify's that it exists in two different places. The reason for this is that a however Henry first heard about Camelot it apllied to Arthur's court and this existed close to Avalon and at Tintagel.
Camelot is a word romanticised by Chrétien de Troyes or even a previous troubadour. Chrétien’s invention of Camelot came in ‘Lancelot, the Knight of the Cart’, when it was first heard of back in the 1170’s and then only mentioned in passing. The name Camelot is completely allegorical for the steps of enlightenment toward spiritual attainment, as the reader will understand later and as a name, becomes the main affirmation of the Grail’s existence. The spiritual nature of the original ‘Grail’ has long been recognized by scholars, but unfortunately little evidence of its original essence can be gleaned from the hundreds of Grail stories that have been fabricated upon it. The original writer of the book of the Grail was cognizant of a ‘Divine Plan’, but the Grail truly becomes a receptacle or even an object when taken in conjunction with its misinterpreted description in Melkin’s Prophecy. The whole aura of the Grail was that it was not just an object originally,what has made it hard to identify is its duality. The Grail is the body of Jesus contained in the Grail Ark and also the objective understanding of a heightened consciousness that becomes aware of a divine plan. This sounds incomprehensible at first, but as we progress the reader will then understand why it has been so difficult to pinpoint what the Grail is in the past. It is the understanding of this divine plan that explains the Grail’s appearance and disappearance and the Grail castles construct becomes synonymous with the gradual steps to gnosis. Many readers will think we are straying into the unreal at this point, but if we can produce the body of Jesus the rest of the evidence will fit into place.

A un jor d'une Acenssion / Fu venuz de vers Carlion / Li rois Artus et tenu ot / Cort molt riche a Camaalot / Si riche com au jor estut.
Upon a certain Ascension Day having come from Carlion, King Arthur had held a very magnificent court at Camelot as befits such a day.

This is the common translation that gives location to Camelot but here Chrétien de Troyes mentions it just in passing……… as King Arthur holds court after having come from Carlion, which according to Geoffrey of Monmouth was his main castle.
Caerleon, according to Geoffrey of Monmouth is the site of Arthur's court and Guinevere's convent, but it is not until the 13th-century French prose romances, including the Lancelot-Grail and the Post-Vulgate Cycle, that Camelot began to supersede Caerleon in mythical importance. However it would seem that Carlion was a place originally referred to by Melkin.
Geoffrey makes Caerleon one of the most important cities in Britain in his Historia Regum Britanniæ. He gives it a long, glorious history from its foundation by King Belinus to when it becomes a metropolitan see, the location of an Archbishopric superior to Canterbury and York. Geoffrey, who attests he sourced from an ancient manuscript makes Arthur's capital Caerleon. So did Melkin in a manuscript left in Britain, mention Carlion….. as we know Chrétien de Troyes' source did and this source is from the French Grail book (also written by Melkin).
Caerleon's importance as an urban center in the early mediæval Kingdom of Gwent may have inspired Geoffrey who was bent on locating Arthur in Wales. The main historical source for Arthur's link with "the camp of the legion" appears to derive from Nennius. In Nennius’ Historia Brittonum is the list of the twelve battles of Arthur, written in the 9th century. However the "urbs legionis" mentioned there may have been further south. Carlion’s superior stature as being one of the three main Caer’ of Britain must be derived from holy importance and its foundation by a King Belinus, certainly gives it an importance not understood today. However if Carlion were in fact close to Avalon we can understand its renown and how there was a source that rated it as superceeding London, Canterbury or York.

Even though Sir Thomas Malory has Arthur re-crowned at Caerleon in Wales also, does it not seem strange that of the forty Caer’s of the original Druidic centers, of which nine today are unidentifiable…… there are none west of Exeter. Especially as we progress with our investigation to uncover The Grail keepers i.e a line of inheritance from Joseph through to King Arthur that existed in the Vales of Avalon.

The three seats of the three Arch-Druids of Britain were Caer Lud or Caer Llyndain, (the city of the lake of the Tain or Thame), Caer Evroc, York and Caer Lleon or Carlion. The Gildas Manuscript in the Cottonian Library, labels these the three arch-flamens and the others the twenty-eight flamens of Britain. Geoffrey of Monmouth appears to have found the same titles in the Armorican version of Tyssilio’s history. These other 28 are:
Caer Caint, Canterbury,
Caer Wyn, Winchester.
Caer Werllan, St. Alban's, or verulam.
Caer Salwg, Old Sarum.
Caer Leil, Carlisle.
Caer Grawnt, Cambridge, or Granta.
Caer Meini, Manchester.
Caer Gwrthegion, Palmcaster.
Caer Coel, Colchester.
Caer Gorangon, Worcester.
Caerlon ar Dwy, Chester.
Caer Peris, Porchester.
Caer Don, Doncaster.
Caer Guoric, Warwick.
Caer Meivod, Meivod.
Caer Odor, Bristol.
Caer Llyr, Leicester.
Caer Urnach, Uroxeter.
Caer Lleyn, Lincoln.
Caer Gloyw, Gloucester.
Caer Cei, Chichester.
Caer Ceri, Cirencester.
Caer Dwr, Dorchester.
Caer Seiont, Caernarvon.
Caer Wysc, Exeter.
Caer Segont, Silchester.
Caer Baddon, Bath.
If the Carlion of Chretien has been misinterpreted to Caerleon in Wales and made to seem to have such an illustrious history (purely by Geoffrey’s penchant to give Arthur a Welsh backdrop), then could the original Carlion of which Melkin and Chretien both spoke of……… have been located west of Exeter. As we shall see much later on in our investigation...... if we have truly located Avalon, the burial site of Joseph of Arimathea and the Grail………and this site was next to Camelot as related in the Perlesvaus,i.e (where Arthur had one of his courts, the other at Tintagel)……… has there been an almighty mix up. Avalon and Camelot are nowhere to be found (until now)……… so considering Arthur was based in Devon and Cornwall, is it only Geoffrey that locates Caerleon in Wales as being synonymous with the original Carlion.

However, Camelot originated from this French source that Chretien used and only later was it developed as a city of consequence and then as an alternative location to Tintagel. ‘Ma'a lot’ is the plural of the Hebrew word ‘Ma'alah’,which means "step", "degree" or "ascent”. Psalms 120 through to 134 represent the cycle of ascension or pilgrimage songs, in Hebrew ‘Shirei ha Ma'a lot’. Chrétien de Troyesis using source material, the significance of which he himself does not know, but has inserted it, as it was in the original source. It would be extremely difficult to explain ‘Shirei ha Ma'a lot’ by not using the word‘Degree Gradual or Grade’ from which Chrétien gets the sense of Graal……essentially describing the stages of mankind’s and the individual’s gradual steps or ascension to the Temple…… the goal of the divine plan being the completion of the third Temple which is the completion of full consciousness. The third temple is to be built in the New Jerusalem, and not in the present day geographical Israel. This is a complicated subject that will be elucidated later.

By Chrétien’s own attestation, he is using a source for his romance, so let us assume this source is called the ’Book of the Grail’ and this transliteration from ‘Shir ha Ma'a lot’ to Camelot was either made by the previous authors translation from the Latin to the French from which Chrétien was now using, or it might just have been fitted into the text due to Chrétien’s or Henry Bois' lack of understanding of how it fits in. However I think this is doubtful as I believe one of the earliest troubadours made this mistake as he had no idea to what the word refers, and from that mistake all subsequent raconteurs have used it as being synonymous with Arthur's courts.
‘Shir ha Ma'a lot’, said as ‘shamaalot’ sounds like Camelot, but how is this ancient Jewish practice from the days of the Temple in Jerusalem finding itself included into the original Latin translation from Hebrew script in ‘The book of the Grail’. This seems unfathomable unless we understand as the Perlesvaus makes abundantly clear, that all the original historical detail of the arrival of the holy family from Jerusalem stems from a record left by Joseph of Arimathea himself. This truth is appealed to many times in the Perlesvaus text, but then confuses the narrator of the story given a name of 'Josephus' with the actual eyewitness account of Joseph of Arimathea.

It seems that the Grail has the element of quest attached to it which is part of its essence in the search for it. It would appear that this (the ‘Shir ha Ma'a lot’ relationship with the Grail) is the root of the element of quest that was weaved into the romances. One gets the feeling from the haltering of Chrétien’s flow and the change in direction of his story, that he is following an unclear plot that he does not fully grasp.
These psalms were sung on the occasion of the great feasts of pilgrimage – Passover, Shavuot and Sukkot – on the way up to Jerusalem and while entering the temple on the steps. They are also variously called Gradual Psalms, Songs of Degrees,and Songs of Steps. Allegorically it is relating the Ascension to the Temple, a religious rite carried out on holy days originally. There are only two people who are eligible to have brought this depth of understanding to Britain (especially being conveyed in Hebrew); either Jesus or Joseph of Arimathea. The root of this word ‘Shir ha Ma'a lot’ can be seen in Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary as being derived from ‘ma`alah’with the given meaning: elevation, i.e. the act (literally, a journey to a higher place, figuratively, a thought arising), or (concretely) the condition (literally, a step or grade-mark, figuratively, a superiority of station); specifically a climactic progression (in certain Psalms), things that come up, (high) degree, go upward.
This casual reference to Camaalot, translated from the original Latin Grail book into French relates to the Ascension of the Temple. This also has been confused with Ascension Day(instead of in manner ascending) by Chrétien and then subsequently, it has metamorphosed into a mythical castle by other Grail writers working from his work. Camelot subsequently became a city of architectural beauty becoming fixed (where the court existed) in Arthurian literature, eventually having geographical reference……… and thus the birth of a legendary city which was unable to be found.
These songs of Degrees were written by King David and Solomon and were highly regarded, each song beginning with ‘Shir ha Ma'a lot’(song of ascents) hence Chrétien de Troyes reference to Ascension. Chrétien’s source material, as the reader will see as we probe deeper, was written by Melkin in his ‘Book of the Grail’ owned eventually by Eleanor of Aquitaine who was patron to Chrétien and related to Henry Blois. Through Eleanor’s Templar connections, the ‘Troubadours’ romanticised and extrapolated version upon version sometimes including the names of courtly figures.

With all the various Grail legends that originated from a common source, the sense of original source material has become barely recognisable. This propagation was carried out mainly by the courts of Europe and the Templars that frequented them, but a body of ‘illuminati’ hiding within the hierarchy of the order, who knew of the real truths that were held within this book were responsible for the St. Michael dedicated churches that lead to the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea.
Not only did the ‘Book of The Grail’ contain historical fact relating to Jesus and Joseph of Arimathea, but more strangely it is buried with them both, along with King Arthur, but we will have to go into much detail, before this becomes apparent.
It seems highly unlikely that a wounded King Arthur was laid out on a horse and cart and driven all the way to Glastonbury after his fight with Mordred or Medrawd, but more likely he was taken to the Island which topographically fits as related in the very romances from which these accounts come from. The reason for taking him there is one, proximity to Tintagel and two, in the hope of a miraculous recovery on the same Island that he knows contains the tomb of the person renowned for his miaculous deeds i.e Jesus.
It was said that the death of Arthur was concealed for quite a time and a wild story was diffused among the populace that he had withdrawn to some magical region, from which at a future crisis he would suddenly reappear. What is more likely is that the legendary Island of Ictis which Joseph possibly owned and the Isle of Avalon are one and the same place. Arthur was taken there, where all his forbears had been anointed as kings, touched with the oil of the Grail Ark.
Arthur was cognisant of who was in the Grail ark and those that brought him there were hoping for a miracle to cure his wounds. This assumption becomes all the more credible if Arthur, who was genealogically related to Joseph, knew that Jesus was buried in the same place as Joseph. Would not the island’s proximity to Arthur’s battleground just 40 miles away, make it a more likely resting place than Glastonbury? It would seem far more plausible that Arthur was carried to the Isle of Avalon (still living), in the hope of a miraculous recovery, where lore had it, even prior to Melkin, that great miracles would be or had been worked there.
This belief in the miraculous, associated with the Island, was subsequently corroborated in Melkin’s prophecy, although posited as happening at a future date when the location is discovered. Certainly this secretive repair to the Island of Avalon would explain the delay of Arthur’s death being published abroad and why is it that such an illustrious figure was not known by William of Malmesbury to be buried at Glastonbury?

King Arthurs supposed burial site under what used to be the main Arch.
Melkin was held in such high regard by medieval chroniclers as we are informed and it is on the genuine antiquity of his Prophecy that the whole of the Glastonbury Myth is based. How modern day scholars think Melkin is an invention is slightly unravelled as his Geometry once decoded now points us to the Island of Avalon. Some say he lived prior to Arthur and Merlin, but it would be difficult to write about Arthur before Arthur had lived. Gildas may make reference to Melkin under another name, but this name could be confused with Merlin if indeed the two are separate. As we shall see, if Melkin wrote the ‘Book of the Grail’ (the source of the French material) and left manuscripts in Britain from which the Welsh material derived; he would have been the one who supplied the information that Arthur was buried in Avalon and it must follow that Melkin then lived after Arthur or latterly contemporaneously, to record this information. Geoffrey of Monmouths’ writings also relate much about Arthur, but this information would have come from Melkin’s other writings that remained in Britain as opposed to the 'Book of the Grail' that went to France. By the last chapter the reader will understand that the 'Book of the Grail' referred to by Helinand may indeed have been written in France.

King Arthur’s tomb, stated by both of the twelfth century historians, Ralph of Coggeshall and Giraldus Cambrensis, and from the thirteenth century monk Adam of Domerham, is said to have been found in 1191 in the old cemetery of the monastery at Glastonbury with the leaden cross. Adam of Domerham even says that curtains may have surrounded the site during the unearthing which smacks of a fraudulent endeavour.
He was said to have been found alone by Ralph of Coggeshall, Adam of Domerham and the aforementioned Leland. He is said to have been found with Guinevere by Giraldus Cambrensis, a Bishop alive at the time of the events, and with obvious intent to link Arthur to Glastonbury:
The memory of Arthur, the famous king of the Britons, is not to be suppressed, forasmuch as of the excellent monastery of Glastonbury, of which he also was the patron, he had been in his days, a principal benefactor and magnificent benefactor, Histories much extol him : for, before all the churches of his realm, he most loved and promoted, the church of the holy mother of God, Mary of Glastonbury : whence, when the warlike man was alive, in the fore part of his shield, he had caused to be painted the image of the blessed virgin ; that internally, he might always have her, in the contest before his eyes, whose feet also, when he was in the moment of engagement, he had accustomed to kiss with the greatest devotion. His body however, which, as fantastic in the end and as it were, by a spirit, translated to a great distance, neither to death obnoxious, fables have been feigned in these our burying ground, hid very deep in the earth in a hollow oak and marked with wonderful, and as it were, miraculous tokens, was found and, into the church, with honour, translated, and to a marble tomb decently commended : whence, also, a leaden cross, a stone being put under it, not infixed on the upper part, as it is wont, ought to be, rather in the lower part which we, also, have seen, for we have handled it, contained these letters, not rising up and standing out, but more within, turned to the stone :
‘Hic iacet sepultus inclitus rex Arthurius in insula Avallonia cum uxore sua secunda wenneveria’ -Here lies buried King Arthur in the Isle of Avalon with his second wife Guinevere.

Figure 13. Showing the cross found in king Arthur’s grave shown in the 1607 edition of Camden’s Britannia. The inscription is not consistent with any known sixth century script and experts place the lettering as tenth century and this does not mention Guinevere.

It certainly seems that Guinevere was a later invention to accord with Grail accounts, but even if Arthur did have two wives, why was there only one body found originally, as attested by other witnesses. It was Geoffrey of Monmouth in his history of the Kings of Britain who says that after the battle in Cornwall (river Camlann), Arthur was taken to Avalon for the healing of his wounds. Geoffrey in no way indicates where the Isle of Avalon is, and William of Malmesbury who wrote before him said Arthur’s resting place was unknown. It would seem however he was aware that Arthur was buried in Avalon, but did not know of the Islands location and this evidence negates Glastonbury from being synonymous with Avalon until later.
It seems as if we can ignore the witness of Giraldus Cambrensis as polemic, even if the monks had not stated that they had re-buried two bodies; then in 1278 had them disinterred again and put them on show with the two skulls for Edward I and Queen Eleanor as those of Arthur and his Queen Guinevere. The bones were, after this showing, then reinterred once more in a tomb in front of Glastonbury’s high altar. The high altar was eventually broken up in the dissolution of the monasteries and the bones are no longer to be found. It seems that the monks set out to convey upon themselves the burial site of such an illustrious figure, just as surely as they had done with their claims that Joseph of Arimathea was buried somewhere within the Abbey grounds. The monks of course, could only do this by laying claim to the fact that Glastonbury was an island at one time and thus making more credible their claim with much contrived ensuing etymology. Glastonbury’s tenuous association with Joseph of Arimathea is shown by the very fact that the monks relied on the corroboration of Melkin's ancient prophecy .i.e they had to convert Glastonbury tor into the Island which, (as the subject of the prophecy) locates Joseph. The Church had to be made of Wattle which we shall cover shortly and a line must be found at Glastonbury, so the whole prophecy about the tomb being found on a bifurcated line sounded convincing that it applied to Glastonbury abbey.

The fact that the original church may well have been dedicated to the Virgin Mary is of little doubt. Gildas records that when King Melwas had abducted Guenivere and taken her to Glastonbury, the kings Arthur and Melwas met at the Church of St. Mary. Gildas was also said to be buried in the middle of the pavement of St Mary's church. However the re dedication story does cast doubt but it does seem likely that the only genuine common parallel with the Melkin prophecyis the early wattle church. It may well have been the one solid association upon which the monks were to base their fraud……even though the ‘adorandam virginem’ part of the puzzle does not apply to the virgin Mary, but gives specific directions on the island.
In the Life of St David, written by the Welshman Rhygyfarch circa 1090, it says that Glastonbury was the first of twelve monasteries to be founded by St. David who died around 600AD. This conflicting information however presented chronological problems for the Glastonbury institution in that St. David could not have founded a church at Glastonbury in the sixth century when as Glastonbury myth maintained there had always been a church there established by Joseph.

William of Malmesbury overcomes this dilemma by coming up with a solution to the conflicting accounts. William says St. David must have originally come to Glastonbury to rededicate the Old Church, which crumbled into disrepair before his time. Then goes on to say that the evening before the rededication was to take place St.David received a vision and Our Lord appeared to him. Jesus apparently instructed St. David that he himself had long ago dedicated the Old Church to his mother and that it would be a profane act to repeat the process.
In a sign Jesus pierced St. David’s hand, which cured itself the following day during the consecration of the mass. However, following this miracle St. David was said to have built a second smaller chapel or chancel at the eastern end of the Old Church and this is the one mentioned on the Bronze Plaque. Where these two chapels met, provided Glastonbury tradition with the perfect excuse to find a hypothetical line to conform to Melkin’s bifurcated line and somehow seem significant:

'in order that it might always be known where the chapels were joined together, a pyramid on the exterior to the north, a platform inside, and the southern end divide them along a line; on this line, according to certain of the ancients, St Joseph lies buried with a great multitude of saints.'

This all goes to show that Glastonbury’s various attempts to mimic certain facts supplied in the prophecy indicates clearly that it is the prophecy which would establish the authority (to the monks) of an association with Joseph……… upon which the Glastonbury myth is based. It would be the prophecy that would supply the credibility for their claim as Avalon if other pertinent parts of the prophecy could also be made to marry with Glastonbury. This also shows that the scholars who say that the prophecy was a later invention of the 12-13thcentury, designed originally to prove the existence of Joseph of Arimathea within the abbey grounds makes little sense. Up until the present, the prophecy has remained mute and largely meaningless except for the meaning that the Glastonbury institution has fraudulently contrived, and led us to believe. Now the riddle is decoded, it points to a completely different island in Devon with established connections to Joseph of Arimathea…… an amazing coincidence for a puzzle supposed to be an invention. At The same time the geometry of Melkin's code(once decoded) is so precise that it confirms Melkin as the Geometer that Glastonbury Chroniclers such as Bale had attested to. This makes Melkin less of an invention because now scholars who, hitherto had been unable to unlock his puzzle, can see his geometry on display.

Once Geoffrey of Monmouth had written his Historia Regum Britanniae, King Arthur gained legendary status and thus any association to him would have been beneficial to fraudulent monks that were perpetrating these mistruths. The original intent however, was laying claim to Joseph of Arimathea's relics, which of course had direct links to Jesus himself. Much undue analysis as to whether the cross unearthed along with Arthur’s remains is the genuine article or not seems completely out of place like so much other scholastic endeavour when the unequivocal answer is revealed.
Returning to our original geometrical form on the British landscape after a somewhat lengthy digression from the pyramids at Glastonbury between which King Arthur was purportedly entombed, we should hear what the Rev William Henry Parr Greswell (1848-1923) says of evidence supplied by Sir H. Spelman (1562-1641):
‘On one of the ancient stone pyramids that used to stand before the cemetery of the monks at Glastonbury, the name of Bregden was inscribed and according to Sir H Spelman, this Bregden gave a name to " Brentacnoll and Brentmersh," just as a certain Logdor or Legder, (possibly an ancient chief), gave the name of Logderesburg or Legdersbeorg to that other ancient possession of Glastonbury Abbey, known since the Norman Conquest as Montacute, (Mons Acutus). Both hills, like the famous Glastonbury Tor itself so having, Montacute claimed a chapel or church, dedicated to St. Michael, that conspicuous saint of seafaring men.’

One of the pyramids had inscribed on it the names, Brent Knoll, Montacute together at Glastonbury in association with St. Michael. The questions are, how old was the inscription, how old were the pyramids, and were the pyramids there before Joseph of Arimathea built his first church? Certainly the step pyramids were both covered with the names of Saxon Bishops and leaders from the seventh century, but these questions need to be asked and answered in the context of the more recently discovered St. Michael Ley Line that becomes an integral part of our pyramidal structure. After all, a pyramid structure on the British landscape has more to do with the ancient culture associated with the Ley line than it does the Glastonbury tradition of Joseph or even the later St. Michael churches in our investigation, built by the Templars. The pyramids themselves were of great antiquity as we shall discover on further enquiry into the Judaic connections of the Britons. However, the inscriptions related, are of a more recent date and the locations mentioned, have all had a St. Michael church built upon them, since 1307. Who was responsible for building churches on these hilltops and how is it that they are an integral part of the pyramidal shape that we have identified on the British landscape? Who laid out this elaborate design, superimposed on a much older design that was constructed by a different culture as shown in figure 14 and what are they trying to show us.

Figure 14 Showing the St. Michael islands pointing out St. Michael’s at Harnhill running through Glastonbury and Brent Knoll and the radius from which describes the Pyramid.

It is from this construct that the Jewish six pointed star is created and later we derive the line that Melkin has sent us to find.
If, for the moment we exclude Montacute as one of the names inscribed on one of the pyramids at Glastonbury(which becomes even more important in a moment) and concern ourselves with St. Michael’s, Brent Knoll, and St Michael's Tor Glastonbury……… we can see that if one was to draw a line through Brent Knoll from St. Michael's Mount in Cornwall (one of the islands on the Lyonesse line), to where it intersects our vertical line, it finds a place called Harnhill, where there is another St. Michael church. Similarly, if we draw a line from Michael's Rock (which is Burgh Island), the other island on the Lyonesse line, (one of the two St. Michael markers on the baseline of our diagram) and we continue it through Glastonbury; it too also converges on the St. Michael church in Harnhill.
St. Michael’s church at Harnhill is Norman in origin. There is a carved tympanum over the entrance to the church, which depicts St. Michael fighting the dragon (see Figure 15). The small West tower has stone slated sides, an unusual feature in the Cotswolds and more often observed in the Home Counties. It is surmounted by an unusual weather vane of a dragon shown in figure 16. The chancel was built in the early 1300’s with a plain chamfered chancel arch and the East window contains pieces of medieval glass constructed of fragments, collected from foundation works that were being dug nearby for the new Rectory.

Figure 15 Showing the tympanum over the door of St. Michael’s church Harnhill of St. Michael slaying the Dragon. Christy Elvin, church warden, Harnhill
These fragments seem to have come from the original window, which probably told the story of St. Michael and were discovered in 1840. A St. Michael church built precisely where the two lines converge to a point precisely located on an old Ley line with a depiction over the doorway of St. Michael piercing the Dragon (from which the surrounding moulding is missing), makes one wonder, “what is the significance of St. Michael in this entire design and why was he singled out by the people who designed it?”

Figure 16.Showing the windvane of a Slayed Dragon on St. Michael’s church Harnhill. Christy Elvin, church warden, Harnhill
The coincidence that other St. Michael churches have disappeared without trace within the design we are investigating, makes one wonder if the destruction of the windows and the mouldings was a deliberate attempt to obscure or distance this church from its St. Michael connections. On top of the tower however, there is also a weather vane portraying a pierced Dragon that is not typical anywhere else in England.

Figure 17 showing the unusual design of St. Michael’s church Harnhill for this area. Christy Elvin, church warden, Harnhill

When a further feature of the spatial relation between the St. Michael churches is revealed, it becomes increasingly evident that they are not randomly located, but arranged in a geometric design. Thus, a circle centred on St Michael’s church in Harnhill, with a radius that passes from Avebury, through Stonehenge, and Old Sarum to the baseline of our triangular diagram fits within the pyramid. Harnhill is the only point from which a circle may be drawn that touches all three sides of the pyramid exactly. Certainly if one wanted to leave directions or marker points on a map, this is the only point from which a circle might be drawn to construct a triangle with all three sides tangential to the circumference that matches our investigation. This of course would only be helpful in the construction of the landscape pyramid, if by chance we had happened upon the discovery of this point before the outline of the pyramid.
One of the mysteries still remaining about Great Pyramid of Cheops there is, where is the cap Stone? Did it ever exist? Was it stolen along with the outside shell of the pyramid? It would have been an extraordinarily large object, if indeed it had at one time, been a whole and single capstone. There is no record of it ever having existed, and Herodotus, (around the time of Pytheas), the earliest Greek commentator to remark upon the ‘pyramidion’s’ absence in 450BC, confirms the outside casing was still in good repair.
It seems that the pyramid purposefully ends near the apex with a small, approximately 35 ft² plateau. If one was to overlay an exact scale drawing of the pyramid of Cheops upon our pyramid that has become apparent on the British landscape, and then one scribes a circle with a radius from our point at Harnhill to the plateau of Giza where the pyramidon is lacking, the circumference passes through St. Michael's rock with the usual precision, as shown in figure 18.

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

The reader may start to think that this is all a bit vague and tenuous, but soon it will tie into Melkin’s prophecy which not only leads us to the Templar treasure but the holiest relic in Christendom.
What used to be an insignificant island, frequented by day-trippers and hikers in the summer time, now seems to be appearing with regular frequency in the enquiries we have made previously. It is called The island of Ictis by Pytheas, the island of Avalon by Melkin and the Grail writers, St.Michael's Rock by Camden, the Isle of the Blest by the author of ‘Vita Merlini’, but it is known as ‘Burgh island’ to the modern world. More importantly it has also been referred to as the Island of Sarras which we shall discover shortly, but it certainly appears that the history of this island has been suppressed more than once but why and by whom?
Referring back to our Templar ring which was purported to belong to a Grand Master, the design of which was described as two interlocking circles centred upon a line within a large amethyst stone; it would seem that figure 19 resembles this description. Could it be that the Templars or a part of that organisation, were responsible for mapping out this great design upon our landscape? This we will show shortly was their way of marking out not only where they cached their treasure but also reiterated the same point to which Melkin’s prophecy leads.

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

The fact that we have found the Harnhill point from what was recorded on one of the two pyramids, seems like a direction to a further discovery. If the relevance of the 18 and 26 foot pyramids positioned at Glastonbury were known, it could be that there might be another large pyramid to construct on the landscape.