As many of you know, I've been on a linguistic journey that has lead me to Mauro Biglino. Biglino's work is very important, and while Biglino's team attempt to put together comprehensive videos, they still seem somewhat inaccessible for most audiences (I'm sure they will get better). In order for us to get a better understanding of his work, I've taken the transcript of his coverage of King Charles III coronation and translated it using GPT AI. The original video is linked below, and the AI translated transcript follows below. ~ p.d.
https://youtu.be/t6HYKZh-ONU?si=G2oC9_dTmj5Pp3hx
Hello, I wanted to look at King Charles III’s coronation rite from a professional point of view, i.e., from a biblical point of view, obviously.
It is a rite that is apparently also esoteric. In reality, it is a purely religious rite. It is an absolutely religious coronation based on the model developed over the centuries of King Solomon’s coronation.
In fact, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is considered the most important bishop of the entire Anglican Church, officiates it, while the king is the head of the Anglican Church. Therefore, it is a religious rite officiated by a religious figure, just as it was done during Solomon’s time.
We read it directly from the Bible from the first Book of Kings, where it is said that the king "David said: call me the priest Zadoc” — the righteous, who is the priest from whom the whole dynasty of Zadochite priests derives — "call me the priest Zadoc, the prophet Nathan and Benaiah, son of Jehoiada. They came before the king, and he said to them: take your lord's guard with you; let my son Solomon ride on my own mule.”
So, in short, instead of using a carriage in those times, they used a mule "and take him down to Ghicon there the priest Zadoc and the prophet Nathan will anoint him king of Israel and you will blow the trumpets and shout: long live King Solomon" so, in short, God Save the King "then you will go up behind him who will come to sit on my throne and reign in my stead because I have made him prince over Israel and Judah."
Instead fact, the whole rite recalls this event and all its aspects.
Do you know that the ancient rites were made up of three fundamental elements?
One was called the “dromena” in Greek, i.e., the things done, therefore, the actions that are performed, and we have seen all the actions that are performed that have their own precise rituals which must be followed.
There was also a small hiccup in the rituality of the actions because, in short, his son William arrived late, and therefore, the king, a little annoyed, had to stop and wait for his son to take his seat.
Then there are the "deiknumena,” that is, the things that are shown, and there are so many things shown; the whole part of the symbology of the allegory was through, for example, all the gifts that were given to them, and therefore the swords, the armillas, that is, the bracelets, the cloak, and obviously the crown.
And then there are the "legomena,” i.e., the things that are said, and among the things that have been said, there is precisely the direct reference to the anointing of King Solomon. There is also the reference to the Holy Spirit, i.e., it was said to a certain point, "the king chosen by the Holy Spirit,” and even here, there is a reference to the election of the Pope, who, as we know should, I say should we all know why, be chosen by the Holy Spirit.
The difference is that, obviously, the Pope is elected, and therefore, the Holy Spirit would inspire the Cardinal electors. Here, the Holy Spirit—if the Holy Spirit has chosen him—would mean that he intervenes from the moment of birth.
Therefore, I am not speaking of conception as that of Maria, but in short, if they say that the Holy Spirit chooses him, the Holy Spirit must have intervened at some point.
As I said before, it also has the appearance of an esoteric rite because many gifts are given to him, i.e., swords, bracelets, and a cloak like Solomon's cloak, but it is not esoteric in the proper sense of the word because in reality all these gifts are explained in their meaning so it's not that their meaning is reserved for those who know it but is explained publicly and therefore everyone knows its value among the "deiknumena" that is among the things shown there is a part that is not actually shown and it is the most sacred moment that is that of the anointing of the king.
You have seen screens put up, and everything takes place inside this temporary artificial chamber built there on the spot, and then the king is stripped and anointed with oil, which indeed comes directly from Jerusalem.
This is also somewhat reminiscent of the rite of the Orthodox mass in which the moment of consecration, obviously in the case of the hosts, is not done in the presence or sight of the faithful. The doors are closed, and everything takes place behind these doors, which is a part of the ritual that is not shown.
Therefore, this, in short, is a parallelism that must also be taken into account.
So, this part is esoteric; the public cannot participate; they must absolutely not.
I have already said that this direct reference to the Holy Spirit exists.
There is also a direct reference to the attitudes that the king must have; for example, the king who wears a ring that symbolizes marriage with the people the king declares to occupy that post not to be served but to serve, and here too we are like in the election of the Pope who is also called a servant of the servants of God, i.e., therefore, in reality, he would be the one who must place himself at the service of the population.
So there are all these elements of the "dromena" that is, of things done, of the “deiknumena” of things shown or not shown, and then of the "legomena" therefore of the things that are said. in that case, a part of a letter from Paul was elected. A part of the Gospel of Luke was read, all of which, as I said, is officiated by the Archbishop of Canterbury and, therefore, it is, to all intents and purposes, a religious rite also because he is head of the Anglican Church.
This gives the idea of the importance of the Bible within this rite because the Bible represents the leitmotif, which is omnipresent throughout the rite.
The reference to Solomon, the things that are said, recall the need to govern with gentleness, with wisdom, with love. The king is given a globe surmounted by a cross. That globe represents the three continents because when it was made, there were three continents known, and therefore, this represents, as for Solomon, that it should have become or at least represent the power of God over all earth.
This is symbolically represented by this globe and by the scepter, which is given to the king, The scepter is the symbol of the command… a command, however, which must be exercised with justice.
However, there is one element they haven't mentioned - at least, I don’t think they have mentioned it - in the description of the whole ceremony, and it is another biblical element. Let's read the passage from which it derives.
When Jacob was sent by his father to look for a wife among the family because you know that it was the custom for wives to be found within the same family, this was to preserve the goods and not to disperse the riches, which were an important element, which was the so-called God's blessing, you know that blessing means precisely receiving material goods, wealth, well-being and health and therefore these material goods had to be absolutely preserved.
Then Jacob went to Upper Mesopotamia, where the other part of Abraham’s family still resided. It is said that Jacob departed from Beersheba and made his way to Carran.
He then happened upon a certain place where he stopped for the night because the sun had set; he took a stone, placed it as a pillow for his head, and lay down in that place,” and it is the place where he then sees this great staircase that unites heaven and earth and is crossed by messengers, that is, gods "malachim" ascending and descending this ladder.
However, the element that interests us is the stone, which has not been mentioned; instead, it is an important element, almost fundamental to the anointing of the King of England. Therefore, this stone, called the stone of destiny, appears in the ceremony of the coronation of the King of England and is placed under the king’s throne.
It is a stone with a very long history because, according to the stories, this is the stone used by Jacob, who was brought to the abbey for the occasion and placed under the throne.
Of course, it must be said that Jacob placed it under his head; there, it is placed under a slightly less noble place, but evidently, it would be difficult to place it on the head or behind the head or under the head of the king and then placed under the throne. This stone would have even started precisely from Bet-El, the name Jacob gave to this place where he saw this ladder along which the “malachim” went up and down.
According to the Scottish story, this stone would come directly from Bet-El, which means El’s house. That is the house where these El or these Elohim were. It would have traveled a long way to get to Scotland, and in fact, it was used to crown the king of Scotland for many centuries.
This stone has made a long journey, starting from Bet-El. It passed through Egypt and Spain before arriving in Ireland, where it was called the roaring stone because, according to the stories, it would have roared the name of the first king of Ireland. Hence, it has been known as the stone of destiny with supernatural powers since then.
So, this stone called Lia Fail, the stone that roared in 840, would have undergone another transport and been brought to the center of Scotland, to the monastery of Scone, to be kept there.
But archaeologists highlight a fact. Since the stone placed under the throne is sandstone, it seems that the sandstone is not known in the territory of Israel or, in any case, in the territory where Jacob was at the time he had that experience; that would be a false stone. Would the monks replace it, and when would they replace it?
They would have replaced it, among other things, with a block of stone weight from their bathrooms, so I mean the whole event in itself is assuming a connotation; in short, that would even be ridiculous, but they would have replaced it when Edward of England, called the hammer of the Scots, invaded Scotland, seized the stone and brought it to England just as a sign of assuming power and therefore also having this stone of destiny in hand, let's say, this stone that speaks gave greater value to his kingdom, to his kingdom which was supposed to extend over both England and Scotland.
This stone would have been brought to Westminster Abbey. Still, it would, at this point, be a false stone, assuming that the former is true, false because, as I said, the monks who had been forewarned two weeks earlier of Edward I's imminent invasion would have had time to replace it.
Since 1296, this stone has been used for the coronation of British monarchs. At the end of the last century, the stone was returned to Scotland as a gesture of magnanimity with the pact; however, it was brought back to England at the time when it was celebrated or a coronation of the monarchs of England was celebrated and then returned.
In fact, after being placed under the throne of the king who is crowned, the stone is returned to Scotland, where it is kept in Edinburgh Castle. So we have all these biblical elements within the acts that are performed, i.e., the "dromena,” the acts that are shown as "deiknumena,” and the things that are said, i.e., the "legomena" within this rite that we experience as a secular rite because we think of the King of England as a lay sovereign, in reality he is a religious sovereign exactly like the Pope.
So the Bible, once again, just like in the oaths that both the President and the head of the Supreme Court, the Bible is present in the Anglo-Saxon world in moments in which a person's power has sanctioned the Bible, as I always say, like it or not, affects the lives of millions, hundreds of millions of people still today and therefore it is for this reason that it is absolutely necessary to know what it contains because it is not only a curiosity, it is not only a pleasure to know, it is not only historical research but it is going in search of the source on which the power of those who govern is based, at least in certain countries.
Also, because the Windsor dynasty has been called that since 1917, why did they take this name in the time of King George V? In Europe, an anti-Germanic sentiment was mounting, and therefore, this family, which was the House of Saxony Coburg Gotha, a German family, decided to change the name and took its name from the castle, from the Windsor palace, but they are actually German.
For example, the same thing was done by the royals of Belgium, who also changed their name because they belonged to the same house. It must be said that this house of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is related to the nobility and the ruling houses substantially from all over Europe; even with the decayed reigning houses, we think of those of Bulgaria, we think of those of Portugal, we think that Maria José herself, that is the consort of Umberto II of Savoy, belonged to that family that is the Saxony Coburg Gotha.
Since we know from the history of migrations and the importance of all these ruling houses that refer to a very ancient tradition from which they derive their power, you understand how important it is to know this also because through the main branch, through the cadet branches, they are still present in the government of Europe and the political government of many nations.
That is, even the members of the cadet branches who have now fallen because they no longer reign anywhere are politically present within the institutions; they are politically present within the national and European institutions, and everything goes back.
Everything leads back to the Houses, which base their power on the Bible. So this is essential to know, and that’s why you need to know well what that book says, whether you like it or not, affects our lives, and I would say it does it, especially in Italy because in Italy we have the Vatican. Bye, thank you, and see you next time.