Dragon Society

Real History, Dragon Philosophy and

The Importance of Royal Bloodlines

from TheDragonSociety Website

recovered though WayBackMachine Website












The Dragon Society

Real History, Dragon Philosophy and The Importance of Royal Bloodlines

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.

Back to Top




The Dragon Society

Real History, Dragon Philosophy and The Importance of Royal Bloodlines
by Tracy R. Twyman


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.


Back to Top 


Back to The Black Nobility




The Dragon Society

Real History, Dragon Philosophy and The Importance of Royal Bloodlines

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


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"

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.


Back to Top




The Dragon Society

Real History, Dragon Philosophy and The Importance of Royal Bloodlines
The Greatest Fraud

by Nicholas de Vere


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.

Back to Top




The Dragon Society

Real History, Dragon Philosophy and The Importance of Royal Bloodlines
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.


which translates as:


Rather more obvious in the second parchment is the following, spelled out in raised letters:


which translates as:


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:


which translates as:


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:


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


which means:


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.

Back to Top




The Dragon Society

Real History, Dragon Philosophy and The Importance of Royal Bloodlines
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.

Back to Top