Graham Phillips' "Merlin" and the Origins of Merlin

[Zadius Sky]

Before I go on to the review of Graham Phillips' Merlin and the Discovery of Avalon in the New World, I would like to first share my fascination about Merlin and about his origins. There's hardly a discussion about Merlin himself on the Forum. But, Laura did once asked the C's, "Who was Merlin?," in the session of 7 Nov 1994 and the answer was "English jolly fellow." I always took that to mean someone who tended to keep himself "amused" and my immediate thought was Geoffrey of Monmouth himself. Laura also discussed about the Merlin and the Stonehenge story in her TSHotW.

Anyway, a fascination with the Wizard Merlin is not new since he is often seen as a kind of the behind-the-scenes choreographer of the political events and quite "mysterious/magical." It was the latter that was hooked to my fancy. Growing up, I often was intrigued by the "mysterious" aspects of Merlin when I first saw him in a Disney movie, The Sword in the Stone (1963) as a kid, and again in many films later on, such as Excalibur (1981), Merlin (1998; with Sam Neill), and King Arthur (2004). The first book that I read of him was T.A. Barron's The Lost Years of Merlin in college.

Heck, I even dressed up as Merlin in my high school's play (for my drama class) where I was telling the audience a self-created story of how I (as Merlin) came across a young boy in Hannibal, Missouri, and told him a story about King Arthur and how one is able to go back in time by several means. My so-called "story" was then retold by this boy when he grew up to be a writer known as Mark Twain. Little did I know at the time that Merlin was portrayed as a villain and a con-artist in his novel A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court.

Over the centuries, the figure Merlin was very popular in various literature as being a Wizard. The word "Wizard" can be broken down to "wise" plus "-ard" (think "-ard" as in being a "drunkard") - basically, "a wise one." It was later that practicing magic or sorcery was added to be a part of this title. Merlin himself was becoming nothing more than a fantasy.

He is also an archetype to be utilized in an extensive amount of stories to demonstrate a "Wise Old Man" character with powers and knowledge for a greater good (or for a greater evil). In a sense, a person who is wise, powerful, and all-knowing.

According to Carl Jung in his Memories, Dreams, Reflections:

The stone stands outside the Tower, and is like an explanation of it. It is a manifestation of the occupant, but one which remains incomprehensible to others. Do you know what I wanted to chisel into the back face of the stone? "Le cri de Merlin!" For what the stone expressed reminded me of Merlin's life in the forest, after he had vanished from the world. Men still hear his cries, so the legend runs, but they cannot understand or interpret them.

Merlin represents an attempt by the medieval unconscious to create a parallel figure to Parsifal. Parsifal is a Christian hero, and Merlin, son of the devil and a pure virgin, is his dark brother. In the twelfth century, when the legend arose, there were as yet no premises by which his intrinsic meaning could be understood. Hence he ended in exile, and hence "le cri de Merlin" which still sounded from the forest after his death. This cry that no one could understand implies that he lives on in unredeemed form. His story is not yet finished, and he still walks abroad. It might be said that the secret of Merlin was carried on by alchemy, primarily in the figure of Mercurius. Then Merlin was taken up again in psychology of the unconscious and - remains uncomprehended to this day! That is because most people find it quite beyond them to live on close terms with the unconscious. Again and again I have had to learn how hard this is for people.

I had had not considered a notion of Merlin being a real person in history until the last five years or so, and his historical existence is still open to debate. No doubt that there is a numerous articles and studies on both King Arthur and Merlin (both literature and historical), which I will try not to go into here. Arthuriana, a journal, is a good source on this subject.

On that related note, there was an interesting article entitled "Was The Green Knight Really Merlin?" in Interpretations (1975) where Charles Long concluded that the character Green Knight in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight was really Merlin, based on remarkable similarities and parallels. Right then, I was starting to realize that you can easily slap the name "Merlin" on any character in any story that you want, just as long as the characteristics are similar to that persona.

So, I went to take a look at the primary source: Geoffrey of Monmouth. He was a cleric in the 12th century and was known for his "chronicle" entitled Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain), which became popular and accepted as an authentic history for several centuries (and it was used in other historians' works during this time). He also wrote Prophetiae Merlini (Prophecies of Merlin) and Vita Merlini (Life of Merlin). It's now been acknowledged that his "chronicle" is a literary work, not a history. For that, he used several sources in Welsh-Latin language as well as the oral traditions along with his own imaginations (more like embellishments, really) for this work as part of his amusement.

The name Merlin didn't appear in Historia until Book 6.17 where King Vortigern is told by his magicians to kill "a boy without a father" and to spill his blood onto the stones to have a better foundation for his castle (so it won't keep falling). The boy Merlin pointed out that there were two dragons sleeping under the foundation, which were then discovered and eventually the king became fond of the boy. It was here that Merlin was also known as "Ambrose."

The scholars asserted that the character Merlin Ambrosius from the above book was based on the story of Ambrose and King Vortigern in Nennius' Historia Brittonum (written around 828 CE), where the story of the citadel/castle and the blood-spilling is ridiculously the same except that Ambrose's father is said to be a Roman consul (not an incubus as Geoffrey emphasized). Instead of dragons, two "serpents" were discovered under the foundation and Ambrose interpreted the meaning of this as an omen for the king. King Vortigern was also mentioned in Venerable Bede's Ecclesianstical History of England (8th century), where Bede is said by scholars to have paraphrased Gildas' work (6th century).

This Ambrose character is also said to have been based on Ambrosius Aurelianu, a Roman war leader who won a battle against the Saxons in the 5th century (at least, according to Gildas).

After Historia, Geoffrey wrote Vita Merlini basing on an individual from the Welsh poems/traditions, named Myrddin Wyllt. This Myrddin was associated with the madman Lailoken, who lived in the Caledonian forest during the 6th century or earlier. It is said that he had gone mad after witnessing the horrors of a war, hid into the forest, and being overwhelmed with visions. He became a legendary prophet, so to speak.

This is the Myrddin who is said to have "died a triple death" as that was very similar to the Norse god Odin's threefold death. I noticed how both names have "-din" in them.

On "two Merlin's," one of Medieval chroniclers and clergymen, Giraldus Cambrensis (Gerald of Wales), wrote in his Itinerary Through Wales (1191 CE):

CHAPTER VIII

PASSAGE OF THE RIVER CONWY IN A BOAT, AND OF DINAS EMRYS

On our return to Banchor from Mona, we were shown the tombs of prince Owen and his younger brother Cadwalader, who were buried in a double vault before the high altar, although Owen, on account of his public incest with his cousin-german, had died excommunicated by the blessed martyr St. Thomas, the bishop of that see having been enjoined to seize a proper opportunity of removing his body from the church. We continued our journey on the sea coast, confined on one side by steep rocks/and by the sea on the other, towards the river Conwy, which preserves its waters unadulterated by the sea. Not far from the source of the river Conwy, at the head of the Eryri mountain, which on this side extends itself towards the north, stands Dinas Emrys, that is, the promontory of Ambrosius, where Merlin uttered his prophecies, whilst Vortigern was seated upon the bank. There were two Merlins; the one called Ambrosius, who prophesied in the time of king Vortigern, was begotten by a demon incubus, and found at Caermardin, from which circumstance that city derived its name of Caermardin, or the city of Merlin; the other Merlin, born in Scotland, was named Celidonius, from the Celidonian wood in which he prophesied; and Sylvester, because when engaged in martial conflict, he discovered in the air a terrible monster, and from that time grew mad, and taking shelter in a wood, passed the remainder of his days in a savage state. This Merlin lived in the time of king Arthur, and is said to have prophesied more fully and explicitly than the other.

The bold line above is very interesting because it could be possible that this particular Myrddin (i.e., Lailoken), or a person that a legend is based on, saw something in the sky (comet?) that could be described as a "monster" and that experience alone was enough to drive him "mad" and to hide into the forest for the rest of his life. Just speculating here, of course.

Denique, Geoffrey of Monmouth combined the existing stories of Merlin Ambrosius and Myrddin Wyllt (Lailoken) as parts of a template of sort for his own fictional character of Merlin, and that character being evolved with magical powers and his back-story being further embellished and/or exaggerated by other writers over time.

A few years ago, I read Count Nikolai Tolstoy's The Quest for Merlin (1985). Like some of the scholars who argued that Merlin had Druid-like characteristics, Tolstoy himself proclaimed that Merlin was a historical figure, being an authentic Druid during the Dark Age period or at least a druid on whom Merlin is based. He seemed to be quite persuasive in that conclusion, as being backed by evidence where he traced this figure historically and at the same time, gave discussion on Merlin's archetypical corpus (though, he skipped any reference to Emma Jung's discussion of the archetypal Merlin in her fascinating The Grail Legend). I thought it was an interesting reading, but I wasn't really convinced of the whole theory - maybe some pieces of it.

Anyway, all of the above is compiled from my notes on Merlin over the years before reading Phillips.

Merlin and the Discovery of Avalon in the New World (2005)

Now, we come to Graham Phillips. The first and last book that I ever read as written by him was The End of Eden: The Comet That Changed Civilization. I read this book back in 2008 and I was impressed with his presentation of historical researches to explain the evidence behind the pre-written historic societies before and after the passing of the comet in 1486 BC, but I just wasn't fully convinced of his theories as the way he presented them.

Laura also talked about him and his book, Marian Conspiracy, in one of Da Vinci Code podcasts (#51).

Graham Phillips is a British historical mysteries researcher, who wrote so far 13 books. He made a lot of controversial claims regarding the Arthurian legend, including the location of "historical Camelot," the discovery of "original Holy Grail," and King Arthur's grave. I haven't read any of his books on this subject until Merlin.

Here is the description of Merlin from Amazon:

The first book to present the true identity of the mythic figure Merlin

• Uncovers historical evidence that the legend of Merlin was based on the life of a real man
• Reveals that Avalon, Merlin’s final resting place, was an island in the United States

The legendary figure Merlin is known throughout the world as the wizard of Camelot who was counselor to King Arthur and helped that monarch create the Round Table. Through the course of a 20-year investigation Graham Phillips has uncovered evidence that this famous story was based on the life of an actual historical figure: the son of a Roman consul who became the last of the Romans to rule Britain in the fifth century A.D. Furthermore, the evidence reveals that he died and was buried in what is now the United States.

According to legend, Merlin ended his life on the mystical island of Avalon. A 1500-year-old saga tells how Merlin left Britain on a boat bound for a mysterious island to the west. The places described in Merlin’s voyage, Phillips argues, would only have been seen by someone who had journeyed to the New World. For example, the island where boiling fountains bubble from the ground could be the geysers of Iceland, and the island with rivers of ice, the glaciers of Greenland.

During his research Phillips discovered that a site believed to be Merlin’s grave was found by the first British settlers in North America: a secret location said to have been preserved in the works of William Shakespeare and the coded writings of the Freemasons. Phillips follows a trail of historical clues that leads ultimately to a mysterious New England tomb. Here a final encrypted message not only reveals the whereabouts of Merlin’s grave but contains evidence that Merlin’s descendants still survive and, through a merger with the Spencer family of Princess Diana, may once again ascend the British throne.

After reading this book, it sure left me confused and I found it to be a bit dubious. Phillips focused mainly on Merlin Ambrosius (Ambrosius Aurelianu), the son of Roman consul, as I mentioned above, and he traced that individual through history.

Overall, I admired the way he presented his research and asking some good questions mixing with his "interviews" and his experiences from his field trips. However, how he interpreted them and how he was "led" to certain direction(s) are questionable, to my mind.

The book starts with his conversations with Glynn Davis (after a snippet of the dramatic scene of the boat ride to Manana Island from later part of the books), who we read as an amateur historian in his late sixties and who we later learned is a Mason. Phillips wrote in the Acknowledgements: "Glynn Davis, without whom this book would not have been possible," which is true because it seemed to me that Phillips was "taken in" by this Davis person, so to speak, and the conversations with him took up the core of the book.

In the first chapter, the author gave his summary about the "real" Arthur (a warlord of the Dark Age, which can be read in his King Arthur: The True Story) before going into the story of Merlin based on Arthurian Romances and legends and the problems of "two Merlins" to which he eventually threw out the Myrddin figure that went "mad" (e.g., Lailoken) and kept the Myrddin being "associated with King Arthur." The discussion points to the fact that the name Myrddin is a title (a good possibility here), which can be accredited to someone else at the time of Arthur. And, he and Davis went on discussing about the Excalibur and two serpents on its hilt and finally about Shakespeare being murdered because of his knowledge about Merlin (where "clues" are said to be found in a play The Birth of Merlin).

Then, he went on talking about a brief history of Britain and of the Celts. Of the latter, the author pointed out that there exists a kingdom of Demetia around 500 AD, which gives a credible possibility to Geoffrey's story of Merlin's birth, about him being the son of a Demetian princess. Then, he recounts the story of King Vortigern and the two dragons, and the true account of the king himself. He then discusses about Dinas Emrys (a town being named after Arthur) and his interview with the archaeologist Sally Evans' about that location. She pointed out that the story of a fortification that kept collapsing is likely to be true - not by Geoffrey, but by Nennius. The author goes into Nennius's background and quoted the story. He then concluded that Geoffrey didn't invent the tale but merely took from Nennius' version. He goes on talking about the history behind the "Roman consuls" (a brief history of Rome) and asking if Merlin was really a son of a Roman consul in the 5th century and pointing to the direction of Merlin as being Ambrosius Aurelius.

Then, he went into the Aurelius family in Suffolk county and found a 4th century plaque which reads "Atticianus Aurelius willingly and deservedly fulfills his vow to Mercury." He goes further about this family where he think that he found the boy's father to be Quintus Aurelius Symmachus, who was a Roman consul around the time of the Vortigern story occurred.

He seemed to be going into a right and interesting direction about Ambrosius Aurelianu himself (though, of who I am still not convinced to be "Merlin" in a magical sense and I'm still fuzzy about the timeline there). In the fifth and sixth chapters of this book, the author discusses Druidism, the lady of the lake (Minerva) in Brittany, and how Ambrosius may have been initiated into Druidism mysteries. The double-serpent on Excalibur equals Druids' hermetic tradition and the sword serves as a religious/political significance. He then focuses on the sword as a symbol of kingship and discusses the history of Attila the Hun and his Sword of the Gods, the sword as wand of Mercury, and the Legend of Lugh that morphed into the myth of Merlin. He insists that the story of Excalibur is not a fairy tale. Finally, he shared with the reader of his traumatic experience of his mails and his sword replica being stolen from his apartment after he came back from his trips. Then, he went into the Shakespeare-Merlin-Rosicrucian conspiracy.

The thing about Shakespeare being murdered was kinda flabbergasting. I'm planning on looking more into this when it's appropriate. Later on in the book, it was pointed out that Shakespeare was involved in a English spy network and making a lot of money for being a spy (which can be read in the author's The Shakespeare Conspiracy). And, finally, it was stressed (by Davis himself) that Shakespeare was killed (apparently by Sir Walter Raleigh) because he "intended to announce that he was [Penelope's] true father." Penelope being a Lady Penelope Wriothesley (1598 - 1667) who married William (Robert) Spencer a few months before Shakespeare died (p. 209). Apparently, at the time, the Rosicrucians doesn't want anyone to know that the playwright "tainted" the so-called a "sacred bloodline."

That's when the book slapped me. I began to think that Phillips was taking me on the whole Jesus Christ="sacred bloodline" trip, but it turned out that he wasn't because apparently this "sacred bloodline" is of Merlin, not Jesus.

Anyway, in the latter part of this book, he was discussing about the possible locations of Avalon until he discovered the final resting place of Merlin on Manana Island ("isle of Avalon"), one of islands of Maine (using clues in The Voyage of Mael Duin's Boat where Mael Duin is Merlin). Then, he shared with us the conversations with Davis about the bloodline, starting with Christian Rosenkreuz being Merlin and how "Merlin established the united bloodline of the British kings."

It was pointed out, in the last chapter, that Penelope's mother, Elizabeth, was a direct descendant of Merlin (Ambrosius) and Penelope became a "true Star Child" for which she would be establishing a "new, mystical dynasty." And, the descendant of this "Star Child" is the present-day Prince William (late Princess Diana's son), so if he were to be crowned a King of United Kingdom, he would "inherit" the powers of Merlin (ability to see the future, etc.).

Here are the snippets about the "Star Child" discussion:

The Birth of Merlin was clearly an analogy for this Rosicrucian ideal of a Protestant union between Germany and England. In the play, Merlin works to unite Britain, as John Dee and his successors hoped to unite Protestant Europe; the supernova in the constellation of the two serpents was seen as heralding a monarchy uniting England and Germany, as the two dragons that fused to become a single star in the play was a portent of the unifying reign of King Arthur.

[snipped]

"The Naometria, the very first Rosicrucian manuscript, written by Simon Studion in 1604, refers to someone called the Star Child who was supposedly born in 1596. In that year, another new star had appeared in the constellation of Cetus, the Sea Dragon. It was not a supernova, however, but rather what astronomers now call a variable star. Its brightness changes over time, and it became visible with the naked eye for a while in 1596. Not only Studion, but other astrologers as well regarded this as heralding the birth of a sacred royal figure, just as the star of Bethlehem accompanied Christ's birth.

"When the much brighter star appeared in 1604, Studion decided it was a second omen regarding this important individual; and as this star appeared in the constellation of the serpents, he linked it with Merlin. Coincidence or not, the fact that Merlin's tomb was found in the same year, 1604, merely confirmed his idea that someone who was born in 1596 - a direct descendant of Merlin's - would become a monarch and found a royal dynasty that would rule in a brave new age of enlightenment. For that reason, he referred to this person as the Star Child."

Then, Phillips immediately assumed the "Star Child" was Princess Elizabeth, but Davis countered that with her being a "diversion" and believed that her daughter, Penelope, was a true "Star Child."

So, instead of reading about the bloodline of The Holy Grail (so-called "the hidden lineage of Jesus"), we'd be reading about a "mystical" bloodline (so-called "the hidden lineage of Merlin"). Interesting that this book came out in 2005, two years after The Da Vinci Code.

I agree with one of the reviewers on Amazon that this book reads more like a Dan Brown/thriller novel and making it a real page-turner. It sure got most of the Arthurian legend, Avalon, Druidism, Roman history, Shakespeare, British Royal families, Rosicrucian, Maelduin, North America, etc. all mixed into a salad bowl here.

It sure got some "interesting" clues here and there, but the real "truth" being discovered here is the fact of having a future king to become a new "Merlin" with magical powers is far-fetched, in my opinion.

I think I was right about one thing - you can easily slap the name "Merlin" on anyone.