The Renaissance King of Korea

Just recently I purchased a Roku box, which allows me to stream content on my TV from the internet. I discovered the Cruncyroll.com application and started watching Korean drama programs. The first program I wastched was "Princess Hours," a fictional what if... What if the Korean Monarchy was still in place? What if a common girl was married to the crown prince? It was fun and interesting and ended after 24 episodes. It piqued my curiosity and I found I really liked this kind of stuff. So I then plunged into the 60 episode historical drama "Dong Yi." What fun that was! I was totally taken by the costumes and the portrayals of life in a completely different culture. I could tell this was highly fictionalized, but it was fun anyway. I followed up with "Jewel In The Palace." And then I took a deep breath and launched into the 77 episodes of "Yi San," based on the life of King Jeungjo, or Chungso - depending on which translator is spellling it.

Once again I was completely enthralled with the pageantry, the costumes, the high emotional drama and court complications and wondered how much of it was true. I wanted to know more about King Jeungjo. He ascended the throne in 1776 and died in 1800 at the age of 48 years.

I want to know more about this king, because he seemed to be quite a visionary. His early years were marred by the death of his father, Crown Prince Sado, at the hands of his father, King Yungjo. Yet, he became one of the few Korean kings given the honorific, "great." (http://www.transparent.com/korean/korean-princes-and-kings/)

King Jeungjo apparently worked very hard at reforming the royal court and Korean society. He seemed to take to heart his title, "Father of the Country," paying attention not only to the nobles and wealthy merchants, but to the lower classes as well. In what I have been able to find out, he cared more about a person being smart and capable than their birth status, and he worked hard to make life more bearable for the lower classes, the people who had no priveleges at all.

Innovative, reformative and hard-working, he is considered one of the most effective rulers of the Josean Dynasty. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeongjo_of_Joseon)

And here is what I find remarkable. On the other side of the world, in 1776, the same year King Jeungjo took the throne, there was a shot heard round the world that he knew nothing of. The world was changing and a new experiment in government was being undertaking during those same years, 1776 to 1800. Our founding fathers in the Americas were struggling to find a way to stop exploitation, to give people a chance to improve their lot in life, to allow them to achieve great things by their own will, courage and ability.

And there, in this tiny country, with no great influence, a tributary to China, stood a king who struggled to do the same thing, stop exploitation, give people a chance to improve their lot in life and allow them to achieve great things by their own will, courage and ability.

How remarkable is that?

I have no illusions. King Jeungjo was not perfect. He was no King Benjamin and his reign had it's own share of treachery and blood, but I believe he was a king who tried, and he came at a time when the world was changing. He was just one step ahead.

And I just find that interesting.

The Celtic Christian Church

My absence has been almost a full year. There are times in our lives when we have to take a step off to the side and look at the path we are on. Where have we been? Where are we now? Is that really where I want to go?

It’s taken me a whole year and I’ve come full circle with a determination to continue on the path I’m on, neither deviating to the right or the left. And so, to quote Samwise Gamgee, from the Lord of the Rings, “Well, I’m back.”

So, where were we? The Arthurian tales and all that. As I read books from libraries, because the internet wasn’t much to speak of then, I kept coming across the phrase, “Celtic Christian Church.” With further reading I discovered this Church had no relationship to Rome nor did it want it.

From “History of the Christian Church” by Philip Schaff, Book 2, I found this little tidbit on pg. 16. “According to Tertullian Britain also was brought under the power of the cross towards the end of the second Century. The Celtic Church existed in England, Ireland, and Scotland, and independently of Rom, long before the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons by the Roman mission of Augustine.”

Tertullian is an ancient historian, and the Augustine mentioned here is not to be confused with the famous Church Father, St. Augustine of Hippo. This Augustine conquered England for Christ and the Roman church around 600 A.D.

Schaff tells us that the Celtic Church took its origins from Gaul and Italy. However, legend traces the Celtic Church to St. Paul and other Apostolic founders. The Venerable Bede, another ancient historian, says that a British King, Lucius, knew about Christianity and applied to Rome for assistance. And in 314 A.D. at the council of Arles in Gaul (France), three bishops from Britain were in attendance.

Obviously, Christianity was thriving in the British Isles long before the church in Rome finally took over in the 7th century A.D. I truly appreciate those novelists and film makers who rightfully make Arthur and his court Christian. All the historical facts point to it. And from this rocky soil, sprang some very great holy men.

Next: Pelagius.

Who was Mordred?

I apologize for the long absence. I’ve been rather occupied with a yeast cleanse diet that has had my brain addled for the past few weeks.

So here we go again. Who was Mordred? Good question. Most accounts agree that he is the son of king Arthur’s sister. Some call her Morgan le Fey, but Morgan is a man’s name, and it means, mor – or “meer” – meaning water. Gan – or guy – or man: water man! Others call Mordred’s mother Morgause and place her as the eldest daughter of queen Ygrain, Arthur’s mother. I like to call her Morguase, the faithful. Recall my earlier blogs about the word Fairy, the Spanish Fe, the Latin Fidelus? Fey is faith.

All we really know about Mordred is that he was a member of the royal family and appeared to be crown prince. He died at the Battle of Camlann, as did Arthur, though it is not specified in the earliest accounts if they were on the same side, or on opposing sides. Also, he had a wife named Guenivere. Some of the later accounts of Mordred claim he abducted Arthur’s queen Guenivere and tried to rule in his stead – usurpation by abduction. But I think it’s this whole thing about titles instead of names that seems to create the greatest amount of confusion.

It’s all possible, of course. But I can’t help thinking of an exhibition I attended during a trip to California some years ago that was about king Arthur. They made the claim that Arthur actually had three wives and they were all named Guenivere. As close as I can tell in my studies, the name means “White Priestess.” And all queens seemed to bear this title. So Arthur had a queen Guenivere and Mordred had a queen Guenivere. So should that make Mordred a bad guy? I don’t think so.

I think he was a legitimate son of Arthur’s sister, Morguase, the throne princess after her mother Ygraine. He had every right to the royal title of prince, and every right to marry a woman of importance, land and property, a Guenivere.

Here I end my speculations about the Celtic culture and the Legends of King Arthur, though I have much much more, and who knows, maybe one day I’ll get around to speculating some more.

Now I’m ready to move on to the real meat, what the search for Arthur finally led me to: The Celtic Christian Church and its great churchmen, Pelagius, Patrick & Gildas. These three are worthy of greater study by our LDS Scholars than they have been. These three kept a light burning through the dark ages of Europe and laid a foundation for the emergence of and thirst for truth that began with our Pilgrim Fathers and continues around the globe today.

Next: The Celtic Christian Church.

The Birth of Arthur

I have given much thought to the birth of Arthur and there are a couple of things that puzzle me.

1. Who was Ygain? What made her so desirable as to go to war over her?
2. Why was it necessary to take the baby Arthur and hide him until king Uther’s death?

All right – we left off with Merlin and his prophecies. One of his prophecies is that the sons of Constantine would come and destroy Vortigern. According to the annals, this is precisely what happened. The two boys who had been whisked away to the mainland, Aurelianus and Uther, returned with an army and chased Vortigern into south Wales, where they were able to trap him. Vortigern’s keep burned to the ground with him in it. Aurelianus, being the older of the two boys, became king.

Aurelianus was considered among the finest kings the Bretons had had. He was brave and good. He made it a point to rebuild all the churches in the land and keep the Saxons at bay. Sadly, he only reined for 10 years before he was assassinated. Upon his death, his brother Uther takes the throne.

Apparently, it’s at Uther’s coronation that he is introduced to the king of Cornwall and his wife Ygerna, or Ygrain. She is considered quite beautiful and desirable, insomuch that Uther is willing to go to war over her.

This, to me, this is déjà vu the Trojan War! As the story goes, Paris abducts Helen (later known as the face that launched a thousand ships) from Macedonia and takes her off to Troy. There is some indication that the Trojans and the Greeks have their cultural basis in the middle-east. So, was it really the face that launched a thousand ships, or was Helen a woman of land, wealth and royal connections? Paris hauling her off was marriage by abduction. By “marrying” her, he controlled her lands and trade routes and who knows what else! Now that makes sense to go to war over. In the end, the king of Macedonia gets Helen back, but then he’s murdered, if I remember right. The whole thing is just tragic.

Back to Breton. Uther goes to war against the king of Cornwall. However, for a long time he is unsuccessful in managing to get his hands of Ygrain. According to later stories, Uther has Merlin enchant him to look like the king of Cornwall. With this subterfuge, he is able to enter the castle and rape and abduct Ygrain. Meanwhile, the king of Cornwall is killed in battle. Uther gets his prize. He marries Ygrain.

If we accept that the Bretons held to Matrilinial rights of inheritance, Uther was simply trying to consolidate his right to rule by marrying a throne princess, a woman of land, wealth and royal connections. Uther had been raised on the mainland by his Roman relatives and had Roman ideas. He would know that to keep his crown he needed to marry a throne princess, but he would want an heir of his body to succeed after him.

Up to this point, Ygrain has anywhere from two to four daughters already. Each were eventually married off to kings. Or did the men become kings because they married these daughters. It’s a right puzzle, just because we don’t really know and I’m only reading between the lines.

This we know, Ygrain then gives birth to a baby boy, and almost immediately that boy is taken by Merlin and hidden so that no one knows where he is.

That brings us to point two. Why? According to some, this was done to preserve the boy against Saxons who would kill the baby. But surely Uther would have some resources to protect his children! And why is it that the boy is not brought forward until AFTER Uther’s death some 15 years later?

Here is my theory! Ygrain was indeed a throne princess, next in line after the sister of Aurelius and Uther. (The brothers would not be so readily accepted as kings without that matrilineal right to be king, either as the brothers of the Throne Princess, or as the husband of the Throne Princess.) But what if Ygrain was already with child by the king of Cornwall? Ah, now, that would put the child in danger. Uther would want a man child of his own to be king, but if Ygrain has already given birth to a boy, then yes, that would mean Uther would have no male heir to take the throne. So, Merlin hides the child, not from the Saxons, but from Uther. Ygrain, being royal and diplomatic, marries Uther, who is now, without question, king. However, he and Ygrain only succeed in having a daughter, Anne.

If you bring in the middle-eastern matrilineal rights of inheritance into the picture, then, for me, the birth and hiding of Arthur begins to make sense. At the death of Uther, the boy, aged 15, is brought forward. Both Merlin and Ygrain vouch for his rights. The boy is hailed battle commander and given the sword Excaliber. Thus begins the rein of Arthur.

It’s just a theory, but I like it.

Next: And so, who was Mordred?

The Prophecies of Merlin

In the book, “The Once and Future King,” Merlin the magician has a wonderful knowledge of the future because, it is said, he has lived life backwards. This is an interesting concept when you consider, by LDS doctrine, all great prophets have received the vision of all things past, present and future.

According to Norma Lorre Goodrich’s research, she states in her book, “Merlin,” published by Harper Perennial, 1988, “Not only was Merlin descended from royalty, but his mother was a nun,… As Son-of-the-Nun he was not only priestly, but high born, and would have been highly educated.’

As Ms. Goodrich grapples with Merlin’s identity, a few things become clear. His importance is based more on the identity of his mother than of his father. He has an enormous roll to play in establishing the royal house of his time and in directing its future course. He is Christian, as Arthur is Christian, and he has many prophecies attributed to him.

The Prophecy of Merlin as contained in The History of the Kings of Britain, by Geoffrey of Monmouth is long and complicated. It’s also available in print if you want to look it up. To me, it doesn’t make much sense, but little is known of the history of the time and what we have was written down hundreds of years before it was finally preserved by Geoffrey of Monmouth. So no one knows what it could have originally said. However, the consensus seems to be that the Prophecy of Merlin is based on older, more Hebraic, or Old Testament forms of writing. That’s quite a claim, I know, but I find the following prophecy attributed to Merlin to be quite interesting.

“The noble cleric Merlin says: ‘For [it is] certain That Britons at the last shall have this land again.’”
(Chronicle, Peter de Langtoft and Robert of of Brunne, edited by Thomas Hearne, 1725, Vol 1, Chap XXII, p. 7.)

According to all historical chronicles of the British Isles, the Saxons eventually forced the Bretons to leave their lands and scatter to Brittany and Normandy in the north of France. But I like this hopeful prophecy, it is reminiscent of some other prophecies you may be aware of.

Judah, from the Holy Bible, has been promised she shall have Jerusalem again. The children of Lehi, from the Book of Mormon, have been promised they shall have their lands of inheritance in the New World again.

I just find that interesting.

Next: The birth of Arthur

The Rise of Merlin

What an enigma this man is. Druid? Priest? Noble? Base? Bastard? Magician? Wise? When the records are obscure, there is really very little that can be known for sure. We have two early records, “Nennius History of the Bretons” and “The History of Great Briton” by Geoffrey of Monmouth. Geoffrey obviously takes much of his account of Merlin from Nennius, for they tell similar stories, but in the earlier “Nennius” the lad is called Ambrose. Geoffrey of Monmouth is the first to call him Merlin.

Merlin - the most famous magician of our western civilization.

Last time we left off with the usurpation of Vortigern to the kingship of the Bretons. According to Geoffrey of Monmouth, he had made himself quite unpopular. According to Nennius, the man was just plain disgusting. However, the most dastardly thing this king did was to invite a Germanic tribe to the island as mercenaries: the notorious Saxons. If you are of English parentage, then you are of the Anglo Saxon race. The Saxon’s were German and they were pagan and they were devastatingly greedy. Once they started coming to the island, they came and they came and they came.

This was the number-one reason Vortigern was so unpopular with the locals. Vortigern consults his twelve wise men, or magicians as to what to do about the situation. They direct him to find a certain mountain and build a citadel there to protect himself. Vortigern thinks this is a great idea, finds a suitable situation and calls the builders to start. They don’t get very far. They build a wall and the next day, it’s gone – vanished! Or it’s tumbled down. Whatever, they can’t get the walls to stay up. Vortigern consults his magicians again. Now they sound like true pagan magicians. They tell him they have to find a boy without a father, kill him and mix his blood in the mortar. Only this way will the walls stand. The king sends messengers throughout the land seeking a boy born with no father. A couple of the searchers comes to a town and hears two boys arguing. One of the boys says to the other, “O boy without a father, no good will ever happen to you!” The messengers find the mother and she confesses she doesn’t know who the father of the boy is, so he’s taken to the citadel with the plan to slay him and sprinkle his blood on the foundations.

A few interesting points here:

1. Vortigern has twelve wise men he consults with. This is interesting because Arthur’s Round Table knights number twelve and sometimes twenty-four depending on who you are reading.
2. The twelve wise men do not appear to be fighting men, but priests of some kind, counselors. In Vortigern’s case, they are obviously pagan.
3. In the book of Mormon, the wicked king Noah has twenty-four priests as his counselors. We also know that good king Mosiah had priests as his counselors.

This is an interesting pattern found on two separate continents. Why would you have priests as counselors? Because in those days governments were sacred and you ruled by the will of God. Therefore, you had to know God’s law. Priests were schooled in the law.

Our young Ambrose/Merlin is not cowed in the least by the shenanigans going on. He’s very direct in asking what’s going on and why. He then demands the wise men be brought to him. In very forceful language he tells them all that killing him will not solve the problem. In fact, there is a pool under the citadel and this is what is causing the problem. He goes on and gives very specific information about what is in the pool – two sleeping serpents, one white and one red – and what it all means. “I will now unfold to you the meaning of this mystery! The pool is the emblem of this world, and the tent that of your kingdom: the two serpents are two dragons; the red serpent is your dragon, but the white serpent is the dragon of the people who occupy several provinces and districts of Britain…however, our people shall rise and drive away the Saxon race.…”

According to Nennius, the young boy knows exactly who he is, his name is Ambrose and his father was a Roman Consul. According to Geoffrey of Monmouth, his mother was the daughter of a king.

The origins of Merlin are most compelling to me. I think it is interesting that the wise men say the citadel can only be completed if:

1. They find a boy without a father.
2. Shed his blood.

Many of the great prophets of antiquity have had miracle births. Noah’s father had been injured and so, supposedly could father no child. But he fathered Noah. Isaac, the son of Abraham, was born to his parents in their extreme old age. It was twenty years before Rebekah finally gave birth to Esau and Jacob. Samuel’s mother was barren until she prayed before the door of the tabernacle. Zachariah and Elizabeth were old when John, known as the Baptist, was born. They all reflect the miracle birth of the Messiah.

This deepens the mystery of this greatest magician of all time. Was he really just a magician? Or was he something more? Mage is another word for Wise, which is another word for Sage. It was wise men from the east that bore gifts to the Christ child, and they are known as the Magi. O how twisted everything gets through the centuries of dust and decay.

Geoffrey of Monmouth picks up the narrative. He says, “I had not yet reached this point in my story when Merlin began to be talked about very much, and from all sorts of places people of my own generation kept urging me to publish his Prophecies.”


Next time: The Prophecies of Merlin

King Arthur – According to Geoffrey of Monmouth

It’s time to start putting all this together.

I take the following information from the next written record of Arthur, “The History of the Kings of Britain” by Geoffrey of Monmouth, who lived and wrote in the 1100’s A.D., centuries after Arthur was supposed to have lived. He claims to have gotten his material from ‘a certain very ancient book written in the British language.’ (Introduction, pg. 11) They think the book was in Welsh. Here is a shortened, paraphrased version of the story.

In the year 410 A.D., the Visigoths, a barbarian tribe from Germany, coveting the lifestyle of the Romans, made their way to Rome and sacked it. That means they burned and pillaged and hauled away booty. This was the beginning of the decline of the Roman Empire. In order to protect itself, what was left of Rome called its border troops home. The Roman soldiers who had kept the peace in Britain withdrew to the mainland. The Pictish peoples of the north, always warlike and fearsome, spilled south and began to wreak havoc.

In this time of chaos and danger, the clergy took council and selected Guithilinus, an Archbishop, to travel to Brittany to get an army. He approaches King Aldroennus and offers him the kingship of Britain. King Aldroennus is not tempted. He likes being ruler in his own land which he rules in liberty. But he offers his brother, Constantine and two thousand troops. Constantine accepts, raises his army and goes to Britain with Guithelinus. The council there accepts him, places the crown on his head, and gives him a noble woman to marry. They have three sons, Constans, Aurelius Ambrosius and Uther Pendragon. Constans, as the firstborn, is given to the church. Aurelius and Uther are given to Guithilinus to be raised, or educated.

After serving as king for ten years, a Pict manages to assassinate Constantine. A disagreement arises about who to put on the throne. Constans is in a monastery. One faction is for putting Aurelius on the throne, another for putting Uther on the throne. But they are all very young. Still others are for putting some other member of the royal family on the throne.

Let’s stop here and take a look at what we have so far.

1. It is the clergy, the spiritual leader of the day, who goes in search of someone to be king and protect the people of the land from enemies which abound on all sides. Am I stretching things to suggest that this sounds like Samuel, the prophet and spiritual leader of his day, seeking out and anointing first Saul, and then David to be kings of Israel? We will see the same pattern with Merlin and Arthur.

2. The firstborn son, Constans, is sent to a monastery. This is just not Roman at all. In fact, it sounds very much like the ways of the tribes of Israel. All firstborn, especially sons, belonged to the Lord. However, once they left Egypt, the tribe of Levites and the sons of Aaron were chosen to serve as the priests and teachers for everyone. Of the rest of the tribes of Israel, they were to pay a ransom of 5 shekels to the priests and Levites, for their firstborns. But what do you do if you are a tribe of Israel without Levites among you to officiate? You go back to the original law. Your firstborn belong to the Lord, they belong to the church. Remember, at this time, no matter what Geoffrey of Monmouth says, the Church in Breton was not Roman. It is referred to as the Celtic Christian church by scholars.

3. What royal family? “Still others are for putting some other member of the royal family on the throne.” That’s what Goeffrey said. Perhaps the better question is, whose royal family? It would have to be the family of Constantine’s unnamed wife. Apparently, she wasn’t just noble, she was royal and that made her sons royal. So why the disagreement? Why not take one of the boys and plunk them on the throne and designate a regent? Perhaps it was because there was no sister, no throne princess, to give the boys a legitimate claim to the throne. Perhaps Roman ways – inheritances passing from father to son – was in conflict with Breton ways – the king was either the brother of the throne princess or married to her.

Out of this conflict rises Vortigern, leader of the Gewissei. He takes the direct Roman approach. He goes to the monastery where the first-born son Constans is living, removes him, dresses him up in royal robes and sits him on the throne. Poor boy, he’s only eight or nine years old. He’s been trained to be a churchman, not a ruler of government. He turns all the affairs of the kingdom over to Vortigern. According to Geoffrey of Monmouth, Vortigern delights in this and, plotting to get the kingship for himself, eventually has Constans assassinated by Picts and takes the throne for himself.

In the ensuing chaos, those who had the care of the two younger brothers, Aurelius and Uther, flee overseas to Brittany for their safety.

Uneasy lies the crown on the head of an usurper who has no inherited right to the throne, by birth or by marriage.

Next time: The Rise of Merlin