Dragon Society

Real History, Dragon Philosophy and

The Importance of Royal Bloodlines
from TheDragonSociety Website
recovered though WayBackMachine Website

Real History
If you were bad at history when you were at school, do not despair! Much of what your teachers tried to
teach you was wrong!

A lot has been written, over the last decade or so, about recent startling discoveries in European history,
particularly in connection with Christianity. We intend to present some of this material in a simple, logical
way. The section is called "Real History" as although we may not be able to prove the conclusion
categorically, the one that is reached must be more accurate than the one that we have been given for the
last 2000 years.

There is also overwhelming evidence that information from a certain organization can provide the
conclusive proof that the theory requires. The other reason for calling it "Real" (from the French) is that it
is essentially "Royal" history as the articles in this section reveal.

Monarchy
 James VI of Scotland
James I of England

When the Stewart King James VI of Scotland ascended the throne of England to become King
James I of Great Britain, he made a speech that shocked and appalled the nobles sitting in Parliament.
They had been waxing increasingly bold over the last few years, attempting to limit the powers of the
crown to strengthen their own. What shocked them was that James used his coronation speech to
remind them of the ancient, traditional belief that a monarch is chosen by God to be His emissary and
representative on Earth, and ought therefore to be responsible to no one but God. In other words,
James was asserting what has become known to history as ‘The Divine Right of Kings’, and they didn’t
like it one bit.

Quotes from the speech show how inflammatory his words actually were:
"The state of monarchy is the most supreme thing upon earth, for kings are not only God’s lieutenants
upon earth, and sit upon God’s throne, but even by God himself are called gods... In the Scriptures,
kings are called gods, and so their power after a certain relation compared to divine power. Kings are
also compared to fathers of families: for a king is truly Parens Patriae, the politique father of his people...
Kings are justly called gods, for that they exercise a manner of resemblance of divine power upon earth:
for if you will consider the attributes to God, you shall see how they agree in the person of a king."
The nobles were aghast. This fat, bloated pustule telling everyone to worship him as a god! It seemed
patently ridiculous. Even more offensive, James finished up his speech by putting Parliament in its place
basically telling them that, since he ruled by the grace of God, any act or word spoken in contradiction of
him was an act against God himself. James continued:
"I conclude then this point, touching the power of kings with this axiom of divinity: that as to dispute what
God may do is blasphemy... so is it sedition in subjects to dispute what a king may do in the height of his
power. I would not have you meddle with such ancient rights of mine as I have received from my
predecessors... All novelties are dangerous as well in a politic as in a natural body, and therefore I would
loathe to be quarreled in my ancient rights and possessions, for that were to judge me unworthy of that
which my predecessors had and left me."
Although it was James I that made the concept famous, he certainly did not invent the idea of Divine
Right. The concept is, as we shall show, as old as civilization itself.

As harsh and dictatorial as it may seem, such a system actually protected the rights of individual citizens
from even larger and more powerful bullies such as the Parliament and the Pope. When power rests
ultimately in the hands of a single individual such as a king, beholden to nobody except God, who need
not appease anyone for either money or votes, injustices are more likely to be righted after a direct
appeal to him. Furthermore, past monarchs who held their claims to power doggedly in the face of
increasing opposition from the Catholic Church managed, as long as they held their power, to save their
subjects from the forced religious indoctrination and social servitude that comes with a Catholic
theocracy. Author Stephen Coston wrote in 1972’s Sources of English Constitutional History that:
"Without the doctrine of the Divine Right, Roman Catholicism would have dominated history well beyond
its current employment in the Dark Ages. Furthermore, Divine Right made it possible for the Protestant
Reformation in England to take place, mature and spread to the rest of the world."
The Divine Right practiced by European monarchs was actually based on a more ancient doctrine
practiced by the monarchs of Judah and Israel in the Old Testament. Many European royal families
considered them to be their ancestors, tracing their royal European lineage back to the Jewish King
David, sometimes through the descendants of Jesus Christ. Such a line of descent was (and is) known
as the "Grail Bloodline."

One of Europe’s most famous monarchs, Charlemagne the Great, was often called "David" in
reference to his famous ancestor, and Habsburg King Otto was called "the son of David." In fact, the
European tradition of anointing kings comes from that practiced in the Old Testament. Author George
Athas describes how the ceremony symbolized the Lord Yahweh adopting the new king as his own
son:
"Firstly, the king was the ‘Anointed’ of Yahweh - the mesiach, from which we derive the term ‘Messiah.’
At his anointing (or his coronation), the Spirit of Yahweh entered the king, giving him superhuman
qualities and allowing him to carry out the dictates of the deity. The psalmist of Psalm 45 describes the
king as ‘fairer than the sons of men’, and continued to praise his majestic characteristics. This king also
had eternal life granted to him by Yahweh. The deity is portrayed as saying to him, ‘You are my son -
today I have sired you.’ The king was Yahweh’s Firstborn - the bekhor - who was the heir to his father’s
estate. He was ‘the highest of the kings of the earth.’ Thus, the king was adopted by Yahweh at his
coronation and, as such, was in closer communion with the deity than the rest of the people. On many
occasions, Yahweh was called the king’s god.

The king was distinguished far above the ordinary mortal, rendering him holy and his person sacred. It
was regarded as a grievous offence to lay a hand on him. Thus, to overthrow the king was rebellion of
the most heinous sort and an affront to the deity who had appointed the king... We can note that the
King of Judah and Israel is described in divine terms. He is, for example, seen as sitting at Yahweh’s
right hand, and his adopted son. We find similar motifs of Pharaohs seated to the right of a deity of
Egypt. Psalm 45:7 calls the king an ‘elohim’ - a god. Psalm 45:7also says ‘Your throne is like God’s
throne.’"
Here we see the basis for King James’ claim that the scriptures likened human kings to gods. As such,
kings were strongly associated with the priesthood as well, and in some cases took on priestly functions.
However, traditionally, the Jewish priesthood was dominated by the Cohens of the Tribe of Levi, which
was biologically related but functionally separate from the royal line of David - that is, until Jesus came
along, heir to both the kingly and priestly titles through his lineage back to both tribes.

However, in other more ancient cultures, such as the Egyptians, the royal and priestly functions were
inseparable. In addition to regarding their Pharaohs as the literal offspring of deities, and in fact, deities
themselves, the Egyptians believed that the gods had given them the institution of kingship itself. Their
first king had been one of their main gods: Osiris, whom all human kings were expected to emulate.
Richard Cassaro, in his book, A Deeper Truth, elaborates:
"... during the First Time [The Golden Age when the gods ruled directly on Earth] a human yet eternal
king named Osiris initiated a monarchial government in Egypt and imparted a wise law and spiritual
wisdom to the people. At the end of his ministry, Osiris left his throne to the people. It was, thereafter, the
duty of every king to rule over Egypt in the same manner Osiris had ruled.
This concept that kingship began with a single divine ruler of whom all subsequent human kings are
descendants can be traced back to the oldest civilization acknowledged by history, Sumeria, and the
other Mesopotamian cultures that followed, such as the Assyrians and the Babylonians. To quote Henri
Frankfort:
"In Mesopotamia, the king was regarded as taking on godhood at his coronation, and at every
subsequent New Year festival. However, he was often seen as having been predestined to the divine
throne by the gods at his birth, or even at the beginning of time. Through a sacred marriage, he had a
metaphysical union with the mother goddess, who filled him with life, fertility, and blessing, which he
passed onto his people."
The Encyclopedia Britannica has identified three different types of sacred kingship that were recognized
in the ancient world. The king was seen as,
(1) the receptacle of supernatural or divine power
(2) the divine or semi-divine ruler
(3) the agent or mediator of the sacred
However, this author believes it is safe to say that all of these concepts stem from the almost universal
belief that kingship descended from Heaven with a single divine being who was literally thought of as the
ancestor of all those who followed. This king, was known to the ancients as Kronos, the Forgotten
Father, and this is another name for the deity/planet, Saturn. He was the ‘brightest star in the heavens",
who fell to Earth and intermarried with the wives of men to breed a race of human kings (the Grail
Bloodline). After that he was imprisoned in the Underworld by his father, Zeus, the Most High God, for
disobeying a social taboo against interbreeding with humans, and sharing secret knowledge with them.

Some might think this contradicts the traditional association of ancient kings with the Sun-God, but in
fact, Saturn himself was a sun god of a sort. In ancient times Saturn was the dominant figure in the
night sky and as such became known as ‘the midnight sun’ (a term later used by occultists to refer to the
Grail). From its position in the sky it appeared to stand still, as the rest of the night sky revolved around
it. It was therefore also called ‘The Central Sun.’

Interestingly, although this theory of mine has long been in the works, I’ve recently stumbled across an
author named David Talbott who shares this hypothesis on the origin of kingship. From a piece on his
website, entitled "Saturn as a Stationary Sun and Universal Monarch’, we read:
"A global tradition recalls an exemplary king ruling in the sky before kings ever ruled on earth.

This mythical figure appears as the first in the line of kings, the father of kings, the model of the good
king. But this same figure is commonly remembered as the central luminary of the sky, often a central
sun, unmoving sun, or superior sun ruling before the present sun.

And most curiously, with the rise of astronomy this celestial ‘king’ was identified as the planet Saturn."
One can see traces of this ancient progenitor of kings just in the word ‘monarchy’ itself. The syllable
"mon" means "one" in Indo-European language systems, as in "The One King Who Rules Over All." But
in Egypt, "Mon" was one of the names of the sun god, (also called Amun-Re) in its occluded state, at
night, when the sun, as they saw it, passed beneath the Earth. The word meant literally for them, "The
Hidden One", because he ruled the world (and the Underworld) from his secret subterranean prison. The
syllable "ark" comes from the Greek "arche", meaning "original", or "originator." As the first "monarch",
Kronos was the originator of kings, the Forgotten Father of all royal bloodlines. Many of our commonly
associated symbols of kingship date back to the time when Kronos first introduced it, and are directly
derived from him.

For instance, the crown symbolizes the (central) sun, the "Godhead" descending upon the brow of the
wise king. The Sumerian kings adorned their crowns with horns, just like Kronos was believed to have
done. The throne was Kronos’ seat on his celestial boat in heaven, and has also been passed down to
us. Kronos and his descendants were known as Shepherd Kings, an appellation used by royalty
throughout history, and this is the origin of the king’s scepter, which was once a shepherd’s staff. The
coronation stone and the orb surmounted by a cross are also Saturnian/solar symbols, and the Egyptian
word for the sun, Re, may be the source of the French word for king, Roi.

Kronos, and the god-kings who followed him, were known by the title "Lord of the Four Corners of the
World." This has given birth to the universal, recurring archetype of "Le Roi du Monde", a concept that
was brilliantly explored in a book by René Guenon of the same name. In a surprising number of cultures
throughout the world and throughout history, there exists this concept of "The Lord of the Earth", an
omnipresent and eternal monarch who reigns from within the very center of the Earth itself, directing
events on the surface with his superhuman psyche. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, "The Lord of the
Earth" is a term applied to Satan, or Lucifer, who, like Saturn, was the brightest star in Heaven, but
was cast down by God. Like Saturn, he was imprisoned inside the bowels of the Earth, in a realm called
Hell.

In fact, it is quite clear that the figure of Satan comes from Saturn, the "Fish-Goat-Man", and obviously
the two words are etymologically related. Perhaps this is why the "Grail Bloodline", the divine lineage
from which all European kings have come, is traced by many back to Lucifer. The medieval Christian
heretics known as the Cathars took this concept to its logical conclusion. They insisted that, since Satan
is the ‘King of the World’ ("Rex Mundi’, as they called him), and Jehovah was, in the Bible, the one who
created the world, Jehovah and Satan must be one and the same. For preaching this they were
massacred unto extinction by the Papacy.

However, in the Eastern tradition, "the Lord of the Earth" represents the ultimate incarnate manifestation
of Godhood. They too see him as ruling his kingdom from the center of the Earth, in a subterranean city
called either Shamballah or Agartha. And in this tradition, the Lord of the Earth is also a super-spiritual
being capable of incarnating on the surface of the Earth in a series of ‘Avatars’, or human kings who rule
various eras of existence.

According to New Age author Alice Bailey:

"Shamballa is the seat of the ‘Lord of the World’, who has made the sacrifice (analogous to the
Bodhisattva’s vow) of remaining to watch over the evolution of men and devas until all have been ‘saved’
or enlightened."
One of the names that the Hindus use for "The Lord of the Earth" is Manu, who, writes Guenon, is,
"a cosmic intelligence that reflects pure spiritual light and formulates the law (Dharma) appropriate to the
conditions of our world and our cycle of existence."
Author Ferdinand Ossendowski adds:
"The Lord of the World is in touch with the thoughts of all those who direct the destiny of mankind... He
knows their intentions and their ideas. If they are pleasing to God, the Lord of the World favours them
with his invisible aid. But if they are displeasing to God, he puts a check on their activities."
These are obviously activities that human kings, as incarnations of the Lord of the Earth, are expected to
replicate in their own kingdoms to the best of their ability. In fact, a number of human kings throughout
history have been viewed by their subjects as incarnations of the "Lord of the Earth", embodying the
concepts that he represents. These include Charlemagne, Alexander the Great (who was believed to
have horns literally growing from his head, just like Saturn), and Melchizedek, a mysterious priest-king
mentioned repeatedly in the Old Testament and imbued with an inexplicable importance. He was called
the "Prince of Salem" (as in Jeru-Salem), and is said to have shared bread and wine with Abraham on
Mt. Moriah. Some believe that the cup which they used is the artifact that later became known as the
Holy Grail.

Some have also identified him with another king of Jerusalem, Adonizedek, and with Shem, Noah’s son.
Nobody knows what his ancestry is, who his descendants might have been, or why, thousands of years
later, Jesus Christ was referred to in the scriptures as, "A priest according to the Order of Melchizedek."

Of Melchizedek’s significance, René Guenon writes:

"Melchizedek, or more precisely, Melki-Tsedeq, is none other than the title used by Judeo-Christian
tradition to denote the function of ‘The Lord of the World’...

Melki-Tsedeq is thus both king and priest. His name means ‘King of Justice’, and he is also king of
Salem, that is, of ‘Peace’, so again we find ‘Justice’ and "Peace’, the fundamental attributes pertaining to
the ‘Lord of the World.’"
Even more pertinent information is provided by René Guenon’s good friend Julius Evola, who in his
book The Mystery of the Grail wrote:
"In some Syriac texts, mention is made of a stone that is the foundation, or center of the world, hidden in
the ‘primordial depths, near God’s temple. It is put in relation with the body of the primordial man (Adam)
and, interestingly enough, with an inaccessible mountain place, the access to which must not be
revealed to other people; here Melchizedek, ‘in divine and eternal service’, watches over Adam’s body.
In Melchizedek we find again the representation of the supreme function of the Universal Ruler, which is
simultaneously regal and priestly; here this representation is associated with some kind of guardian of
Adam’s body who originally possessed the Grail and who, after losing it, no longer lives. This is found
together with the motifs of a mysterious stone and an inaccessible seat."
Clearly, that foundation stone of the world is the same as the Black, or Hidden Sun in the center of the
Earth, or the ‘Grail Stone’ which is said to be hidden in that location. The Grail Romances provide us
with much insight into the ‘King of the World’ concept. He is represented in the story by one of the
supporting characters, Prester John, a king who is mentioned in passing as ruling over a spiritual
domain in the faraway East, and who, quite fittingly, is said to come from Davidic descent.

Evola continues:
"The Tractatus pulcherrimus referred to him as ‘king of kings’ rex regnum. He combined spiritual
authority with regal power... Yet essentially, ‘Prester John’ is only a title and a name, which designates
not a given individual but rather a function. Thus in Wolfram von Eschenbach and in the Titurel we find
‘Prester John’ as a title; the Grail, as we will see, indicates from time to time the person who must
become Prester John. Moreover, in the legend, ‘Prester John’ designates one who keeps in check the
people of Gog and Magog, who exercises a visible and invisible dominion , figuratively, dominion over
both natural and invisible beings, and who defends the access of his kingdom with ‘lions’ and ‘giants.’ In
this kingdom is also found the ‘fountain of youth.’"

"The dignity of a sacred king is often accompanied by biblical reminiscences, by presenting Prester
John as the son or nephew of King David, and sometimes as King David himself... ‘David, King of the
Hindus, who is called by the people ‘Prester John’ - the King (Prester John) descends from the son of
King David."
The "Lord of the Earth", or the figures that represent him, are often symbolized by a victory stone, or a
foundation stone which is emblematic of their authority. For instance, British kings are crowned on the
"Stone of Destiny", believed to have been used as a pillow by Jacob in the Old Testament. Such a stone
is often referred to in mythology as having fallen from Heaven, like the Grail Stone, which fell out of
Lucifer’s crown during his war with God, and became the foundation stone for the Grail kingdom, having
the power, as it is written, to ‘make kings.’ Because it fell from Heaven, the Grail is also often associated
with a falling star, like that which Lucifer represents. Of course the Black Sun in the center of the Earth
also represents Rex Mundi‘s victory stone. It is interesting, then, that in the Babylonian tongue, the word
"tsar" means "rock", and is not only an anagram of "star", but a word that in the Russian language refers
to an imperial monarch.

Sometimes the monarchial foundation stone is represented as a mountain, especially the World or
Primordial Mountain that in mythology provides the Earth with its central axis. The Sumerians referred
to this as Mt. Mashu. Its twin peaks were said to reach up to Heaven, while the tunnels and caves within
it reached down to the depths of Hell. Jehovah in the Bible, sometimes called El Shaddai ("The Lord
of the Mountain") had Mt. Zion for a foundation stone, and was believed to actually live inside of the
mountain. Later, the kingdom of Jesus Christ was said to be "founded upon the Rock of Sion".

The stone that fell from Heaven, the royal victory stone, is also sometimes depicted under the symbolic
form of a castrated phallus, such as that of Kronos, whose disembodied penis was hurled into the
ocean, and there spawned the Lady Venus. This story is a recapitulation of the Osiris story, as well as
the inspiration for the Grail legends, in which the Fisher King is wounded in the genitals, causing the
entire kingdom to fall under a spell of perpetual malaise. The only thing that can heal the king, and
therefore the kingdom is the Grail. This is a recurring theme in world mythology. The king and/or the
kingdom that temporarily falls asleep or falls under a magic spell which renders it/him ineffectual for a
time, until the stars are right, or the proper conditions are met. This causes the king and his kingdom to
reawaken, to rise from the ashes, from the tomb, or often, to rise out of the sea.

The cycle recurs in the tales of the Lord of the Earth, who alternates between periods of death-like sleep
within his tomb in the center of the Earth, and rebirth, in which he once again returns to watch over his
kingdom, to restore righteousness and justice to the land. He then presides over a new, revitalized
"Golden Age".

Julius Evola writes of the archetype:

"It is a theme that dates back to the most ancient times and that bears a certain relation to the doctrine
of the ‘cyclical manifestations’ or avatars, namely, the manifestation, occurring at special times and in
various forms, of a single principle, which during intermediate periods exists in an unmanifested state.
Thus every time a king displayed the traits of an incarnation of such a principle, the idea arose in the
legend that he has not died but has withdrawn into an inaccessible seat whence once day he will
manifest, or that he is asleep and will awaken one day... The image of a regality in a state of sleep or
apparent death, however, is akin to that of an altered, wounded, paralyzed regality, in regard not to its
intangible principle but to its external and historical representatives.

Hence the theme of the wounded, mutilated or weakened king who continues to live in an inaccessible
center, in which time and death are suspended.... In the Hindu tradition we encounter the theme of
Mahaksyapa, who sleeps in a mountain but will awaken at the sound of shells at the time of the new
manifestation of the principle that previously manifested itself in the form of Buddha. Such a period is
also that of the coming of a Universal Ruler (cakravartin) by the name of Samkha. Since samkha means
‘shells’, this verbal assimilation expresses the idea of the awakening from sleep of the new manifestation
of the King of the World and of the same primordial tradition that the above-mentioned legend conceives
to be enclosed (during the intermediate period of crisis) in a shell. When the right time comes, in
conformity with the cyclical laws, a new manifestation from above will occur (Kalki-avatara) in the form of
a sacred king who will triumph over the Dark Age.
"...many people thought that the Roman world, in its imperial and pagan phase, signified the beginning
of a new Golden Age, the king of which, Kronos, was believed to be living in a state of slumber in the
Hyperborean region. During Augustus’ reign, the Sibylline prophecies announced the advent of a ‘solar’
king, a rex a coelo, or ex sole missus, to which Horace seems to refer when he invokes the advent of
Apollo, the Hyperborean god of the Golden Age. "
Rene Guenon, Evola’s good friend, believed in this concept, and that the periods of slumber for the
Lord of the Earth have been cyclically brought to a close by apocalypses. After this, Le Roi du Monde
would return to clean up the wreckage and once more look after his faithful flock. In the Revelation of St.
John the Divine, three kings actually return from periods of slumber, death, or prolonged absence:
Jesus, Satan, and Jehovah, and naturally, the governmental entity that God chooses for this utopian
world is the one which has always been associated with holiness and righteousness: monarchy.

Monarchy was the first form of government observed by man, and it was, according to almost every
culture, created by God himself. It is the primordial, archetypal form of government, the most natural,
that which all other forms of government vainly try to mimic, while at the same time violating its most
basic tenets. Monarchy was, for thousands of years, all that man knew. The idea of not having a
monarch, a father figure to watch over them, to maintain the community’s relationship with the divine,
represented to them, not freedom, but chaos, uncertainty, and within a short time, death. The common
people did not jealously vie for positions of power, nor did they desire to have any say in the decision of
who would be king. In fact, most of them preferred that there be no decision to make at all: most
monarchies functioned on the principle of primogeniture, passing the scepter and crown down from
father to son, or in some cases, through the matrilineal line. The decision was up to nature or God, so
therefore just and righteous in itself.

Furthermore, they knew they could count on their king or queen to watch over them as they would their
own children, to be fair and honest, to protect them from invasion, to maintain the proper relationship
between God and the kingdom. They desired to make their kingdom on Earth reflect the order and
perfection that existed in God’s kingdom in Heaven.

And for thousands of years before the modern era, when 90% of the population was not intellectually
capable of participating in government or making electoral decisions, monarchy stood as a bulwark
against the disintegration of the societal unit, providing a stability that otherwise could not be achieved. If
monarchy had not been invented, human history could never have happened.

Richard Cassino, in A Deeper Truth, said it best:

"Since the obligation of every king... is to maintain law, order, morality, spirituality, and religion within his
kingdom, then the very design of a monarchy itself was probably conceived by the superior intelligence
called God so as to endow mankind with a sound system of government. In other words, the concept of
kingship was designed for, and delivered to, the peoples of earth by God to teach mankind to live in a
humanized social environment... Human history, with its past and present kingdoms and kings - Egypt,
Assyria, Persia, Babylon, Sumer, Aztec, Inca, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Great Britain, to name a few -
stands as a testimony to the fact that the monarchial form of government has been the basis for almost
every civilization."
If monarchy is the most perfect form of government, and if it has been responsible for providing us with
at least 6000 years of human history, why now does it seem to be only an ancient pretension? Why is
the concept of having a monarchy actually function in government considered to be a quaint but
laughable thing of the past? Have we really moved beyond monarchy?

Hardly. If you were to graph the entire 6000 years of known human history and isolate the period in
which civilized nations have been without monarchs, it would be merely a blip on the spectrum. In fact,
of the civilized Western nations, few do not have a monarch reigning either de jure or de facto (although
they continue to elect Presidents from royal European lineage.) Most nations that maintain
representational government still have a monarch either recognized by the government, or by the people
at large. Although essentially powerless, these monarchs maintain a symbolic link between a nation and
its heritage, its most sacred, most ancient traditions.

They also constitute a government-in-waiting, should the thin veneer of illusory ‘freedom’ and ‘equality’
that maintains democracy break down. The modern system of Republican government is based not so
much on the freedom of the individual, but on the free flow of money, on debt, usury, and inflation, on a
monetary house of cards known as "Fractional Reserve Lending." It would only take a major and slightly
 prolonged collapse of the monetary system to eliminate this governmental system. At that point, civilized
man will have essentially two choices: anarchy or monarchy, and if people have any sense at all they
will choose the latter, rather than subjecting themselves to a chaotic succession of despots interspersed
with periods of violence and rioting, and the poverty that comes with the lack of a stable state.

It would be the most natural thing in the world for the royal families of Earth, as well as the monarchial
system which they have maintained, and which has maintained us for thousands of years, to just slide
right into place. The kingdom of the gods, who once ruled during man’s Golden Age, would awaken from
their slumber and heed the call to duty, like Kronos, their Forgotten Father, and monarch of all, who
soundly sleeps within his tomb in the primordial mountain, waiting for his chance to once again hold
dominion over the Earth.

The Code of a Revolution

The Background

Many Christians in Europe and North America today feel that the stories in the New Testament should not
perhaps be taken as literally as they were a few generations ago. Of course Darwin’s theory of evolution
has contributed much towards this. Also, in industrial societies, we do not feel such a need to pray to God
for harvests, even though we may appeal to him for good weather for our holidays as a kind of insurance
policy. There are, of course, those who take every word in the New Testament literally, and their beliefs
have to be respected.

However, we have to bear in mind that Palestine at the time of Jesus Christ was a country in chaos.
Three thousand Jewish rebels were crucified under the occupying power of the Romans after they had
assumed direct rule of the Jews in 6AD. Pontius Pilate was a cruel and corrupt ruler who compounded the
atrocities committed by his predecessors. It is therefore surprising that there were no openly anti-Roman
writings in the Bible to relate these circumstances. Not even such incidents as the burning of Rome by
Nero were mentioned.

Beit She’an Roman Theatre, Israel

 There was a bewildering array of active Jewish sects and sub-sects at the time. Jesus Christ was a Jew,
and there is evidence that his sympathies were with the Jewish uprisings organized by such groups.
According to The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception, Jesus Christ seemed to have connections with most of
them. It is difficult to differentiate among the various groups. There were the Pharisees who, despite
what is said in the Bible, were anti-Roman, although rather more passively so than other sects. The
original Greek version of the Bible refers to Jesus Christ as a Nazarene. This was later wrongly
interpreted to mean that he came from Nazareth. It is believed that the town of Nazareth did not exist
at the time of Christ’s birth as there is no contemporary mention of it.

The sect, the Nazarines or Nazarites, were certainly in existence at the time of Christ, and Christ’s
brother, James, and John the Baptist were both Nazarites. The modern Arabic word Nasrini means
Christian, and derives from the Hebrew Nazrim, a plural noun that comes from the term Nazrie-ha-Brit
which means ‘Keeper of the Covenant’, a rank of the Essenes Community at Qumran on the Dead Sea.
The Nazorites were associated with the Community of the Essenes in the time of the Gospels. The
Essenes were an austere mystical sect whose influence at the time is underestimated. The Nazarites
were an important sub-sect of the Essenes.

It is highly probable that if Christ did not actually belong to the community known as the Essenes, he
was well-versed in their beliefs and sympathized with them. The Essenes believed strongly in the
coming of the Messiah, descended from the line of David.

There was also a group called the Zealots. They were not an independent sect, rather a group whose
members originated from other sects, and constituted the ‘strong-arm’ of the movement against the
Romans. Their activities would today be termed ‘terrorist’ and the uprising of the whole of Judea against
the Romans in 66 AD was the result of their activities. Although the Jews were massacred by the
Romans after this revolt, the activities of the Zealots continued unabated for another century after Jesus
Christ’s death.

The Church of Ecce Homo where Pilate allegedly judged Jesus

Even if Jesus Christ had not been a Zealot himself, he was crucified as one. The two men who were
crucified with him certainly were Zealots. Jesus Christ embarrasses the church by being reported as
saying that he has come not to "bring peace but a sword". He asks his disciples to purchase swords [Luke
22:36], and checks that they have swords after the Passover meal [Luke 22:38]. According to the fourth
Gospel, Simon Peter is carrying a sword when Jesus is arrested. In the context of the day, these are
surely the descriptions of a leader who is prepared for and willing to take part in violence. Certainly Christ
was executed by the Romans in the way that they reserved for revolutionaries.
Jesus Christ had no intention of forming a new religion. The idea that the Messiah was regarded as divine
would have been preposterous to the Jews. The Greek word for Messiah is ‘Christ’ or ‘Christos’, and
means anointed one, or king. When David became king, he was also a ‘Messiah’ or ‘Christ’. When Jesus
was born, he was also seen as being the Messiah because of his Davidic pedigree. The Jews felt that this
new-born king would be the one who would deliver them from the Romans.

Herod’s Northern Palace with 2000 year old frescoes

It is evident that the stories in the New Testament are told in an allegorical way; in a code that would be
understood by some of the Jews and not by their Roman rulers. Words that are used seem strangely
unrelated to their actual meanings, until, perhaps, we consider how certain terms have come into the
English language. We can say, for example, "He used to be on the board, but now he is in the Cabinet."
This, of course, does not mean, "He used to be on a piece of wood, but now he is in the cupboard."

These words and phrases (in Hebrew pershar in the singular, persharim in the plural) had the same
meaning each time they were used. Additionally each time the meaning was required, the persharim
were used.

Before looking at some of the more familiar stories from the Bible, here are some of the words used in
the New Testament and the explanation of what they really mean. The following explanations are taken
from the Persharim, the Manual of Discipline, the Community Rule and the Angelic Liturgy as quoted in
The Bloodline of the Holy Grail.
for those with ears to hear
this was the signal that a statement that there would follow a message that could be interpreted by those
who knew the code

Babylon
Rome

the word of God, the word

Jesus Christ

the lion
the Roman Emperor

the poor
those who had been initiated into the higher ranks of the Community and had therefore had to give up
their worldly wealth
the many
the head of the celibate Community

the crowd
a designation of the regional Tetrarch (governor)

the multitude
the governing council

the children
the novices within the community

the Way
the doctrine of the Community

the Children of Light

those who followed the doctrines of "the Way"

leper
a person who has not yet been initiated into the higher Community

the blind
those who did not follow the doctrine of "the Way"

the Power, the Kingdom, the Glory

the Priest, King and Prophet of the Community
The Loaves and the Fishes
The story of the loaves and fishes is an example of a parable. As an example of how the coding was
used to inform "those with ears to hear" let’s look at one of the more familiar stories from the Bible, and
see how the code was used.

Gentiles who wanted to be baptized in the Judaic tradition were referred to as "fishes". They were
hauled out of the water into boats by "fishermen" to be blessed by the "fishers" who were the priests.
Similarly, the Levite officials of the Sanctuary were known as "loaves". In the ordination rite, the Levite
priests would serve seven loaves of bread to the priests and five loaves and two fishes to the celibates.
The Gentiles were allowed to receive baptism only as "fishes" whereas only Jews could become
"loaves".

At these ceremonies the "fishermen" would take their boats out into the water, and the Gentile fishes,
who were to be baptized, would walk out into the water. When this had taken place, the priest "fishers"
would walk out into the water along jetties, and thus "walking on water" to the boats. As Jesus had been
born into the house of Judah, and was therefore not a Levite, he was not entitled to act as a baptismal
priest, but he chose to disregard this convention, and "walked on the sea" to the disciples’ boats.

One of the main aims of Jesus Christ’s philosophy was to bring the "unclean" Gentiles together with the
Jews, and furthermore to let them take part in what had been reserved for the Jewish priesthood. There
was a group of uncircumcised Gentiles known as the "Five Thousand", and Jesus granted the
"multitude" (in other words, their governing body) the serving of five loaves and two fishes that were
otherwise the reserve of the Jewish priesthood candidates.

None of this detracts from any skills Jesus Christ may have had as a healer. However, it was not a
healer that was predicted to arrive as the Messiah. What differentiated Jesus from the others was that,
despite the feelings of such groups as the Pharisees, he extended his medical expertise to the
"unworthy" and "unclean" Gentiles, thus illustrating his ideal of a united people against the authority of
the Romans.
Bibliography
• The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln
• The Messianic Legacy by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln
• The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh
• The Bloodline of the Holy Grail by Lawrence Gardner
•
The Greatest Fraud
by Nicholas de Vere
2003
The Donation of Constantine first appeared during the 8th century and was a document which purported
to recognize the Roman popes as Christ’s representatives on Earth and to donate to Pope Sylvester
and the Roman Church all those Imperial powers formerly invested in the Throne of Byzantium.

The ’Donation’, the Church claimed, was written in the 4th century at the insistence of the emperor
Constantine. The Church said that he was so grateful for having been cured of leprosy by Pope
Sylvester, that he gave into the Church’s hand the entire power and wealth of the unified Roman
Empire, including the right to crown and dethrone kings. Now that is what you call expensive medical
insurance.

Supposedly written before 337 AD - the year of Constantine’s death - the Donation of Constantine
actually didn’t make an appearance on the stage of European history until four hundred years later. So
far-reaching are the powers bestowed upon the Church by this document, one would have thought that it
would have been made public at the time of its bestowal. Not centuries later.

The provisions of the Donation were enforced in 751 AD following which the Merovingians were
deposed by the Church and replaced by their sycophants, the Mayors of the Palace who later became
known as the Carolingians. The Church had made a pact with the Mayors and offered to ’recognize’
their legitimacy as rulers if they would dispense with the true Dragon Kings. The deal was done and the
Carolingians were made the puppet rulers under the Roman Church.

The Donation, because it was made by a Dragon King, Constantine, legitimized the Church’s right to
take this action. To all intents and purposes they had the authority of Dragon Kingship given up to them
by this Charter. No doubt the Merovingians knew this to be a fraud, which is why they refused to
recognize the authority of the Church to meddle in affairs of state. What do we learn from this?

We can see from the Church’s choice of ’benefactor’ that the Church was well aware that universally,
only those of the Dragon Blood would be recognized as true kings. Therefore they chose Constantine
as he was known to have been descended from both the Britannic PenDragon House and the Dragon
House of David. Furthermore he was a member of the Desposyni - the heirs of the Lord - the blood
descendants and legitimate representatives of Jesus Christ. In the Donation, it appeared as if
Constantine had relinquished his hereditary spiritual position as a Messiah and invested it in the Papacy.

By suggesting they were the representatives of Christ, the popes were claiming Dragon descent for
themselves. It was well known that Jesus had descendants and that they were part of the only Eurasian
dynasty which was authorized to be kings - the Elven Overlords or Dragons. It would have appeared to
the public then, that in the displacement of the Merovingians, one Dragon dynasty was being replaced
by another, albeit a paper one. This reduced any danger of mass unrest. As time passed however, it
became uncomfortably clear that the function of kingship under the Merovingians had been entirely
different to that under the Carolingians. Whilst the Merovingians had formerly assumed the role of
overseers, sages and wise counsellors, the Carolingians and their successors, prompted by the Church,
became deliberately poorly educated, ignorant, insensitive tyrants and territorial tradesmen.
Dragon Kingship and the Grail Code had died to be replaced by a corrupted form of feudal
totalitarianism and brutal, economic slavery as the Church carefully and strategically replaced the old
dynasties with its own merchant-class client families who, from that day on, became vassals of the
Vatican.

Lastly we learn that from 751 AD the true Dark Age began in earnest. The Elven Holocaust was
initiated and would run its course for another thousand years until, in England at least, the witchcraft
laws were repealed in 1736. North of the border in Scotland, however, the persecution of witches in the
1700’s was at its fiercest until the end of the century.

During this time, history has witnessed the rise of the Church of Rome and its successful struggle for
power. In time, no dynasty ruled in Europe or remained in power unless the Church sanctioned their
reign. The Church chose the royal families, it crowned kings and it deposed its detractors. In short, the
Church, under the auspices of the Donation of Constantine was the sole and supreme temporal power in
Europe and the known world. Without this purported imperial benefice however, the Church would have
remained a marginalized Mediterranean cult contesting for patronage along with a host of other gnostic
Christian denominations.

The royal dynasties, sponsored by the Church and crowned by its Divine Right, instituted their courts
and parliaments, passed laws and employed agents to act on their behalf. To all intents and purposes it
seemed as if the Church had the absolute right of Dragons and wielded power by the very sanction of
Jesus Christ and God.

No monarch reigning today and no government under the monarch or instituted in their name would
enjoy their position if the Church, empowered by the Donation, had not given them permission to rule in
the first place. Without the Donation of Constantine, European history today would be totally different
and none of the dynasties past or present would have had the right to have reigned. Nor would they
reign now and none of their governments or agencies would have exercised power.

One slight problem, though. The Donation of Constantine is a complete and utter fraud and the Church
was never given any temporal powers at all, let alone the right to found dynasties, crown kings or
institute governments. The whole document was a lie from beginning to end and has been known to be
a fake since Lorenzo Valla applied the methods of historical criticism to it during the Renaissance.

How do we know Valla was correct? The New Testament references incorporated into the wording of the
Donation were taken from the Latin Vulgate version of the Bible. The Vulgate Bible was compiled by St.
Jerome who was born more than two decades after Constantine was supposed to have signed the
Donation. The actual Vulgate Bible wording that appears in the Donation didn’t exist until St Jerome
invented it, fifty years after the document had supposedly been dated and signed by the Emperor. By
this time Constantine had been dead for decades and couldn’t have signed the Dragons’ rights away
anyway.

The language of the Donation is eighth century clerical or dog Latin, whilst the Latin used in the 4th
century Empire was late classical Roman. The Imperial and Papal ceremonials described in the
Donation didn’t exist in Constantine’s time but were developed some centuries later.

Several documentary instances of the Church’s use of the Donation to assert their authority in the
medieval period still exist, including the letter of Pope Gregory IX entitled ’Si Memoriam Beneficiorum’
dated October 23rd 1236 and addressed to the Emperor Frederick II. Pope Gregory writes,
".......that as the Vicar of the Prince of Apostles (the Roman Pope) governed the empire of priesthood
and of souls in the whole world, so he should also reign over things and bodies throughout the whole
world; and considering that, he should rule over earthly matters by the reins of justice to whom - as it is
known - God had committed on earth the charge over spiritual things. The Emperor Constantine
humbled himself by his own vow and handed over the empire to the perpetual care of the Roman Pontiff
with the Imperial Insignia and sceptres and the City and Duchy of Rome........".
People in the medieval and Renaissance period, confronted with this document, did not generally
criticize the Donation on the grounds of its veracity. They just exclaimed aghast that they could not
believe that Constantine would have been stupid enough to have given the Roman Church everything.
From the Donation we understand that Constantine offered the Pope all the robes and Crowns of office
but the Pope, being such a humble man, gave them back to the Emperor. This lets the Church off the
hook should some malcontent turn up and ask for sartorial evidence. If the readers read the Donation for
themselves they will be appalled at the pretentious egotism, the arrogance and the sheer material greed
of the Church, as authors of the document.

The fraudulent imperial power of the Vatican to create kings by ’coronation’ - derived from this faked 8th
century ’Donation of Constantine’ - was later adopted by the Archbishops of the Church of England with
the complicity of the Tudors, who were Catholics themselves.

When he split with Rome, Henry VIII still retained and later ratified and re-established in the Anglo-
Catholic Church of England the fraudulent right of the Church’s clergy to create by coronation, a
succession of British monarchs. This was an illegal act. The ’Donation of Constantine’ was proved to be
a completely fake document. Therefore no Royal Elven House that knew its origins and cared about
social justice could possibly bring itself to recognize a Christian British monarchy or any of their Church
sponsored, Church crowned predecessors or any of their regnant or formerly regnant, European cousin
Houses.

Because the Donation was a fraud and no subsequent priest of any Catholic derived denomination ever
had the right to crown kings, Britain has had no legally reigning monarch for 900 years. As a
consequence of this, all the laws passed by these monarchs were and are illegal and worthless and all
the governmental agencies set up by or derived from these monarchs or their laws are also illegal and
worthless up to the present day.

When considering this, the reader might like to consider the fact that all the arrests ever made by the
police in Britain and Europe are acts of kidnap and habeas corpus. Equally, any man who has taken up
arms for the Crown and killed for his country is unprotected by law and guilty therefore of murder.

However, paradoxically, as the entire British legal system is illegal, there are no laws, and so the crimes
of habeas corpus and murder as we define them today, simply do not exist. Subconsciously people
know that their politicians and monarchs have no legitimate authority to rule over them. They manifest
this knowledge in an increasing disrespect for these optional, arbitrary and illusory social conventions,
which is yet another reason why social order is breaking down.

If the UN is right, we may face chaos in the near future; and all because of a stupid fraud, perpetrated by
a group of myopically greedy, maniacal peddlers of false religion who are now long dead.

Again, for asserting this kind of view the Fairies are implicitly guilty of Treason, even though all British
laws are constitutionally illegal and the act of treason itself is a non sequitur. Think of the implications of
this.

It applies to any nation state in the Christian world today which is still a monarchy or which has evolved
as part of a successive, developing political process originating from a monarchy, by virtue of its
continuing sanction from, or sponsorship by, the Church of whatever denomination. It is unauthorized by
any temporal or divine power to coerce anyone to obey any law originating at any stage of that
government’s evolution.

In effect, Britain, Europe and America are ruled by the sword, and that sword is being wielded by people
who are no more than short sighted, self seeking robber barons. They have no constitutional right to rule
even in America, where in the 19th century, the libertarian commentator, Lysander Spooner,
demonstrated that the consensual nature of the original document, upon which the subsequent,
consecutive clauses are founded, was being flouted, thereby making the entire Constitution illegal.
Pierre Proud’hon called them all "Tyrants and Usurpers". Next time you are tempted to eulogize
Western Democracy, bite your tongue and let your brain select first gear before you open your mouth.
Flawed or otherwise, the idea that the English speaking world has any democracy at all is a joke.

At the beginning of this work the author stated that the people have been conned enough. He now
 hopes that the readers might appreciate for themselves the precise extent to which the people have
actually been deceived. They have accepted a state of affairs where they and their ancestors have been
enslaved by a chameleon-like corporate body that has destroyed their creativity and robbed them of
their psychological liberty and their freedom of conscience for over a thousand years.

The entire moral basis of our society is founded upon a massive historical lie which has twisted the
minds of generations of individuals until they have become terrified of the natural drives of their own
bodies and souls.

The resultant taboos that have been created have been used to divide the minds of the people and
make them dependant on the Church-State for solutions to the problems of resisting Satan and fighting
temptation and sin, when these contrived, nonsensical whimsies never existed in the first place.

As a result, western Christian society was turned into an open air lunatic asylum packed full of lost souls
who weren’t lost at all and had no need of a cure for diseases of the soul they weren’t actually suffering
from in the first place.

The Church created the confusion and the division and then offered the solution. In fear the population
invested its trust in the perfidious Church and in return for their confidence the Church turned the people
into slaves and an entire civilization into a manufacturing plant to service their own greed for luxury and
power.

For a thousand years the Fairies have remained silent about their identities - formerly for fear of their
lives - latterly for fear of becoming social outcasts and objects of mirth and derision. Still however, a
shadow of menace lies over the ancient families. Greed will go to any length to ensure the continuity of
its satisfaction and the same motives that prompted the Church to murder and lie in the past, still
prompt their merchant-class puppets to kill and deceive today.

The Discovery
Rennes-le-Château is a village situated on a mountain peak 25 miles from Carcassonne in southern
France. A few miles away there is another mountain called Bézu on which there stand the ruins of a
former centre of the Knights Templar. About a mile east from Rennes-le-Château are the ruins of the
castle of the Blanchefort family, and the home of Bertrand Blanchefort, the fourth grandmaster of the
Knights Templar. The Knights Templar are the so-called Warrior Monks who were proclaimed by Pope
Innocent II in a Papal Bull in 1139 to owe allegiance only to the Pope, and were therefore under no
obligation to kings and princes. Effectively they constituted an autonomous international empire.
 The church at Rennes-le-Château

Bérengere Saunière, the priest of Rennes-le-Château, decided to partly renovate the church the village
church in 1891. It had been consecrated to Mary Magdelene in 1059, and was built on the site of a
Visigoth church that dated back to the sixth century. When the altar stone was removed, Saunière found
that one of the pillars that it stood on was hollow. Inside this column were four parchments kept in two
sealed wooden tubes. Two of them were apparently genealogies. One dated from 1244, and the other
from 1644. The two others had been written in Latin by one of Saunière´s predecessors, Abbé Antoin
Bigou, who had been personal priest to the Blanchefort family – important landowners in the area.

These parchments dated from the 1780s, and seemed to be written excerpts from the New Testament in
Latin. However, in one of the parchments, the words were written without spaces and extra, at first sight,
unnecessary letters had been added. In the second parchment, some letters had been raised above the
others. The following decipherment has appeared in French documents written about Rennes-le-
Château, and the book The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and
Henry Lincoln, and the BBC films that they made on the subject.
BERGERE PAS DE TENTATION QUE POUSSIN TENIERS GARDENT LA CLEF PAX DCLXXXI PAR
LA CROIX ET CE CHEVAL DE DIEU J’ACHEVE CE DAEMON DE GARDIEN A MIDI POMMES
BLEUES
which translates as:
SHEPHERDESS, NO TEMPTATION THAT POUSSIN, TENIERS, HOLD THE KEY; PEACE 681, BY
THE CROSS AND THIS HORSE OF GOD I COMPLETE - or DESTROY - THIS DAEMON OF THE
GUARDIAN AT NOON, BLUE APPLES
Rather more obvious in the second parchment is the following, spelled out in raised letters:
A DAGOBERT II ROI ET A SION EST CE TRESOR ET IL EST LA MORT
which translates as:
TO DAGOBERT II, KING, AND TO SION BELONGS THIS TREASURE AND HE IS THERE DEAD
Saunière realized that he had stumbled upon something important, and therefore took the parchments
to the Bishop of Carcassonne. He was immediately ordered to go to Paris, at the Bishop’s expense,
where he met various important ecclesiastic authorities. During the three weeks that he spent there,
Saunière was accepted into the circle of Émile Hoffet, the nephew of the Director General of the
Seminary of Saint Sulpice. Hoffet was training for the priesthood, and was a well-respected scholar of
linguistics, cryptography and palaeography. He was also involved in esoteric, occult groups, which
included the writers Stéphane Mallarmé and Maurice Maeterlink, as well as the composer Claude
Debussy. The famous opera singer, Emma Calvé, also mixed in these circles, and is reputed to have
had an affair with Saunière, or at least a very close friendship with him. While there, Saunière bought
reproductions of three paintings from the Louvre, one of which was Les Bergeres de Arcadie - The
Shepherds of Arcadia by Nicolas Poussin.

When he returned to Rennes-le-Château, he continued renovations on the church, and he discovered a

burial chamber in the church that, it is said, contained skeletons. He also turned his attention to the
sepulchre of Marie, Marquise d’Hautpol de Blanchefort. This had been designed by Abbé Antoin
Bigou, and the rearranged letters on the inscription formed an anagram of the code above referring to
Dagobert II. Saunière, for no explained reason, obliterated the inscription, but did not realize that it had
been copied elsewhere. He developed the habit of wandering around the countryside with his
housekeeper, Marie Denarnaud, collecting stones and rocks. He was also in correspondence with
people all over the world, and spending a large amount of money on postage alone. Needless to say,
this was abnormal behaviour for a humble priest in the French countryside.

He was extravagant in many other ways too. A road was built leading up to the village, and the Tower of
Magdala was built. A new house was built – Villa Bethania - which Saunière never occupied. The church
was decorated in an opulently bizarre way. Over the porch was put the inscription:

TERRIBILIS EST LOCUS ISTE

which translates as: THIS PLACE IS TERRIBLE

 The church door
at Rennes-le-Château

Tracy Twyman points out in Dagobert’s Revenge,

"this is a quote from Genesis, where Jacob falls asleep on a stone and has a vision of a ladder leading
up to heaven, with angels ascending and descending. This, of course, is the same Stone of Destiny
brought to Scotland by Joseph of Arimathea, and became the stone upon which British monarchy are
crowned, even today. What’s noteworthy is that beneath the words ’This Place is Terrible’ seems to be
completed by the words in Latin ’but this is the House of God and the Gateway to Heaven’, making it not
a curse, but a statement upon the dual nature of divinity."
Immediately inside the entrance to the church, Sauniere placed a statue of the demon Asmodeus - the
demon in charge of secrets, guardian of hidden treasure and, according to Judaic tradition, the builder of
the Temple of Solomon. He was also known as "the Destroyer", as well as "Rex Mundi", the "Lord of the
Earth." Inside the church garishly painted Stations of the Cross were painted, and in some there are
inconsistencies. For example:
• in Station VIII there is a picture of a child dressed in Scottish tartan.
•
Station XIV depicts Jesus’ body being carried at night under a full moon in the vicinity of a tomb. It could
mean that his body was being carried to the tomb at night, several hours after the Bible would have us
believe. Or perhaps the body is being carried out of the tomb..

There are statues of five saints whose initials spell out G.R.A.A.L. (as in Holy Grail):
• Saint Germain
• St Roch
• St Anthony de Padoue
• St Anthony the Hermit
• St Luke
In the shape of an "M". This "M" has been supposed, for reasons that will later become apparent, to
stand for "Magdelene".

Reference is also made for the first time by Tracy Twyman in Dagobert’s Revenge that,
"the church wall featured the telltale marking, a yellow stripe embedded in the foundation, which was
used in those days to indicate that as early as the 8th century someone of royal blood was buried inside
the church."
And Saunière continued to spend. He had a magnificent library installed in the Magdela Tower that he
had constructed, he built an orangery and a zoological garden and accumulated valuable collections of
china, fabrics and antiques. His parishioners were treated to huge banquets and received visits from
various well-connected figures. The most noteworthy of his visitors was Archduke Johann von
Hapsburg, a cousin of Franz-Josef, emperor of Austria. According to banking records, the Archduke paid
considerable amounts of money over to Saunière.
The Tower of Magdela

Although the church turned a blind eye to these goings-on, it reached a point when the bishop of
Carcassonne had to act, and he summoned Saunière to make an account of himself and his dealings.
He accused Saunière of simony, that is, the selling of masses. Saunière flatly refused to reveal anything,
and the Bishop therefore suspended him. However, Saunière appealed to the Vatican, and he was re-
instated.

Then on January 17th, 1917, at the age of 65, Saunière had a sudden stroke. The date is of interest. It is
the same date as the death of Marie, Marquise d’Hautpol de Blanchefort, whose tomb inscription
Saunière had obliterated. It is also the feast day of Saint Sulpice who crops up again and again in this
account.

Of particular significance, however, is that five days before his death, on January 12th, Saunière
appeared to his parishioners to be in good health. But this was the day that his housekeeper, Marie
Denarnaud, ordered his coffin. The priest who heard Saunière’s deathbed confession, according to
some, "never smiled again" and he refused to give Saunière the last traditional Roman Catholic rites of
extreme unction.

Saunière died on January 22nd. His body was sat upright in an armchair on the terrace of the Tour
Magdala. He was dressed in an ornate robe with scarlet tassels attached. One by one unidentified
mourners filed past his body, and some took a tassel off the robe. Nobody has ever been able to explain
this odd procedure.

To the astonishment of everyone, when the will was read, Saunière was discovered to have died
penniless. Shortly before his death, he had transferred all his money to his housekeeper. It is possible
that she had been in charge of the money all along.

After the Second World War, the French government introduced a new currency, and all citizens were
obliged to exchange their old francs for the new ones. Large amounts of money had to be accounted for
in order to trace "black" money saved by collaborators, tax-evaders and the like. Marie Denarnaud
would not reveal the source of her money, and was to be seen later burning large amounts of cash in the
garden of the Villa Bethania. She eventually sold the house to Monsieur Noël Corbu, and told him that
before she died she would tell him a great secret, which would make him not only very rich but also very
powerful. Unfortunately, much to the chagrin of Monsieur Corbu, on January 29th, 1953, she, like
Saunière, suffered a sudden stroke, and was rendered speechless and prostate on her deathbed.

Where the money could have come from

The obvious question that springs to mind is where did Saunière’s money come from? The village and
the surrounding area had been the centre of considerable activity from the time that the Celts
designated it to be a sacred site to the time when the Cathars were persecuted in the 11th century. There
had been tales of hidden treasure throughout this time, and the Cathars especially were suspected of
being the possessors of the "Holy Grail". The Knights Templar also were thought to have hidden
treasure in the area, and Bertrand de Blanchefort organized excavations there. The Merovingian kings
ruled much of modern France from the 5th to the 8th centuries, and Dagobert II, who was one of them,
married a Visigoth princess. Rennes-le-Château was, at that time, one of the major centres of the
Visigoths. The Visigoths themselves had considerable treasure accumulated from their pillaging of
Europe, and in particular most of the wealth of Rome in 410 A.D..

Saunière could have discovered any of this, but the nature of the treasure appears to one’s instincts to
be more that of a secret. Otherwise certain factors, such as the introduction he received to the Parisian
intelligentsia from Hoffet, and the intense interest that the church took in the matter. It also doesn’t
explain why the priest refused to give Saunière the sacrament of extreme unction, and why he was
visited by, for example, the Archduke Johann Salvator von Habsburg.
The Archduke renounced rights to his titles in 1889, and was banished from the Austrian Empire.
Treasure of "mere" monetary worth would also not explain the codes in the parchments and on the tomb
of Marie, Marquise d’Hautpol de Blanchefort. Also Marie Denarnaud said that the secret she took with
her to the grave involved not only money, but power. The money that Johnann Salvator von Habsburg
paid over to Saunière came perhaps from another source. The Vatican treated Saunière very carefully
in the latter years of his life. Could it be that the money came from the Vatican in order to silence him?

The Mystery Deepens

When The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail first came out, the authors received a letter form a retired
Anglican priest who claimed that he had "incontrovertible truth" Jesus Christ did not die on the cross and
could have lived to as late a date as 45 A.D.. On being interviewed, he claimed that he had been told the
information by another Anglican priest, Canon Alfred Leslie Lilley. Throughout his life, Lilley had
maintained contact with the Catholic Modernist Movement that was based at Saint Sulpice in Paris, and
he had known Émile Hoffet. The authors felt that this connection added authenticity to his claim.

The French painter, Nicolas Poussin, also appears to play a rôle in this account. He was visited in
Rome by Abbé Louis Fouquet, the brother of Nicholas Fouquet, the Financial Superintendent to Louis
XIV of France, in 1656. After the meeting the Abbé wrote to his brother. Part of the letter reads:
"He and I discussed certain things, which I shall with ease be able to explain to you in detail - things that
will give you, through Monsieur Poussin, advantages which even kings would have great pains to draw
from him, and which, according to him, it is possible that nobody else will ever be able to rediscover in
the centuries to come. And, what is more, these are things so difficult to discover that nothing now on
this earth can prove of better fortune nor be their equal."
Nobody has been able to explain the rather cryptic message in this letter, but the fact is that shortly after
receiving this letter, Nicholas Fouquet was imprisoned for life in solitary confinement. It has been
suggested that he was the model for The Man in the Iron Mask. All his correspondence was confiscated,
and handed over to Louis XIV who read it only in private. Louis XIV went to great lengths to buy
Poussin’s painting, Les Bergers d’Arcadie which he had hidden away in his private apartments at
Versailles. You will recall that it is a copy of this painting that Berenger Saunière buys at the Louvre
during his visit to Paris.

The painting depicts a large ancient tomb with three shepherds and a shepherdess in the foreground.
The setting is of a rugged landscape that is typical of Poussin. The inscription on the tomb reads:
ET IN ARCARDIA EGO
The landscape had always been assumed to be a product of the artist’s mind. However, in the 1970s, an
actual tomb was located which was identical in shape, dimensions, vegetation, background and setting.
There is even rocky outcrop that is identical to that one which one of the shepherds rests his foot. If you
stand just in front of the tomb, you will see that the view is exactly the same as the one in Poussin’s
painting. The corresponding peak in the background is that of Rennes-le-Château.

The tomb is located just outside a village called Arques, 6 miles from Rennes-le-Château and 3 miles
from the château of the Blanchefort family. There is no indication of the age of the tomb. The village
records state that the land surrounding the tomb belonged to an American who opened the sepulchre in
the 1920s and found it to be empty. He died in the 1950s and was later buried in it with his wife.
Which brings us back to the inscription on the tomb in Poussin’s painting. It appears to not make much
sense, as it lacks a verb:
And in Arcadia I…
However, an anagram of the inscription reads
I TEGO ARCANA DEI
which means:
BEGONE! I BEHOLD THE SECRETS OF GOD
Perhaps the mayor of Rennes-le-Château was correct when he said to Tracy Twyman last year, "This
place is the centre point of the world."

Now go to The Conclusion to read some of the conclusions that have been reached.

Of course, a subject of this magnitude cannot be covered adequately in an article of this length. We
therefore recommend you to read The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh
and Henry Lincoln from which we researched much of the information given here.

The Conclusion

After painstaking research, the authors of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, Michael Baigent, Richard
Leigh and Henry Lincoln, reach some fascinating conclusions about the Christian faith and western
history in particular. They do not attempt to maintain that these conclusions are 100% accurate, but the
evidence that they produce is very compelling. It is impossible in an article of this length to do justice to
their findings, but in short, they conclude:
• Jesus and his wife, Mary Magdelene, had several children who were brought upon a Jewish
community in southern France. In the 5th century it seems that the descendants of these children
married into the royal line of the Franks, bringing about the Merovingian dynasty.

• The Roman Catholic Church made a pact with Clovis, one of the Merovingian kings, in 496 AD,
in which it pledged itself for all time to the Merovingian bloodline. This was presumably because
they recognized the true identity of the bloodline. Clovis was offered the title of Holy Roman
emperor, and therefore did not become king.

• The Church played a part in the assassination of Dagobert II, and was never able to forgive
itself for this. It resulted in the betrayal of the Merovingians, and it was vital to the Church that
this knowledge was not widely known, as it would have played straight into the hands of Rome’s
enemies.

• The bloodline continued. To a great extent this was aided by the fact that the Carolingian royal
family (the family of Emperor Charlemagne) married Merovingian princesses in order to
legitimize themselves. Dagobert’s son, Sigisbert, was the ancestor of Guillem de Gellone, ruler
of the Jewish kingdom of Septimania in southern France, and later Godfroi de Bouillon, who
later captured Jerusalem. Thereby it restored the bloodline of Jesus Christ, the Davidic line,
back to the origin that had been rightfully its own since the time of the Old Testament.

• Rome was unable to suppress the truth completely, and it is probable that the truth of the matter
was revealed through such literature as the romances of the Holy Grail.
The theory goes on to conclude that the Holy Grail had two simultaneous identities. First was that of the
"Sang Real", the "Real" or "Royal" blood of which the Knights Templar were guardians. Secondly, it
would have meant the vessel or receptacle of Jesus’ blood (or rather semen), that is the womb of Mary
Magdelene. Thus many of the churches that are supposedly dedicated to the "Virgin" Mary had in fact
been dedicated to the Magdelene. It can be proved that this is the case with many of the "Black Virgins"
or "Black Madonnas" of the Middle Ages.
Another identity of the Holy Grail may also have been the treasure that had been plundered in 70 AD
when the emperor Titus plundered the temple of Jerusalem. This vast wealth eventually found its way to
the Pyrenees, and is today reputed to be in the hands of an organization called the Prieuré de Sion. As
well as this treasure, the Temple of Solomon is likely to have contained birth certificates, marriage
certificates and other documents relating to the royal line of Israel. It would no doubt also give evidence
of Jesus Christ’s claim to be King of the Jews. It could also have contained his actual body once it had
been removed from its tomb as reported in the Gospels.

Although there is no evidence that Titus or his soldiers found such documentation, logic would lead us
to believe that the soldiers would have been happy with the copious amounts of gold and jewels that
they were to carry away, thus leaving the way clear for other more sensitive documentation to be
sequestered.

By the year 1100 AD the descendants of Jesus Christ had reached prominence in Europe and also
through Godfroi de Bouillon in Palestine. Even though they may have been well aware of their
ancestry, they may not have been able to prove it without the documentary or other proof that remained
at the Temple of Solomon. This would explain the excavations that the Knights Templar made around the
area of the Temple at that time. There is good evidence, not only that the Knights Templar were sent to
Jerusalem to find something, but that they did, in fact, succeed, and returned it to England. It is unclear
what happened to it then, but it seems clear that the fourth Grand Master of the Order of the Temple,
Bertrand de Blanchefort, concealed something near Rennes-le-Chateau.

It was here that German miners were brought to construct a hiding place. There is speculation over what
this may have been ranging from Jesus’ marriage license and/or birth certificates of his children to his
mummified body. Any of this may have been passed to the Cathars in the area of Languedoc near
Rennes-le-Château, who were massacred mercilessly by the 30,000 of the Pope’s soldiers. One soldier
had asked how they should know who to kill. The reply was "Kill them all. God will recognize his own."
Treasure was hidden at the Cathar stronghold of Montségur (below) which was under siege for ten
months until March 1244.

There was a royal tradition through Godfroi and Boudouin de Bouillon that is based upon the "Rock of
Sion" and that in status equalled the foremost European dynasties. Both the New Testament and, later,
Freemasonry, maintain that the "Rock of Sion " is the same as Jesus.

Once the Merovingians had re-established themselves in Jerusalem, they could better afford to make
the facts known. This explains why the Grail romances, which were associated so closely with the
Knights Templar, started appearing at this time. In time, no doubt, the full truth of the Merovingian kings
would have come out, and they would have ruled extensively over Europe, replacing the Pope, and
making Jerusalem the capital of the Christian world. If Jesus had been accepted as a mortal prophet, a
priest-king and the descendant of the Davidic line, he would also have been accepted by the Moslems
and Jews. That would obviously have changed Middle East history significantly.

However, this was not the course of history, and the Frankish kingdom of Jerusalem did not succeed.
With the loss of the Holy Land in 1291, to the Muslims, the Merovingians were sidelined, and the
Knights Templar rendered redundant. Since that time, the Roman Catholic Church has continued to
strengthen at the expense of the truth.