I have been privileged to visit Glastonbury on a number of occasions, once with each of my 4 kids and once most recently last fall with my wife. One time I was there all by myself -- brisk March day, threateningly overcast. The Tor in the distance was half shrouded in mist.
On that same occasion, I sat on one of the lichen-covered, ancient choir seats directly across from what is marked with a simple weathered sign on a pole and outlined in stone as the presumed tombs of Arthur and Guinevere. I sat there for roughly 20 minutes completely undisturbed.
There are remnants of what might be termed progressive construction as the building advanced in size over time in each of 3 discreet sections. As I strode deliberately (as if in my own processional from the rear Lady Chapel to where the front altar and the Edgar Chapel are located) I simply marveled at what had to have been the sheer magnitude of the place.
The monks' residence burned in 1184 and the actual discovery of Arthur's tomb was made amongst the tombs of other monks on the land adjacent to where the cathedral was finally built in 1191. It was marked by a crude Latin-inscribed lead cross bearing Arthur's name.
Naturally, all the notoriety of the discovery assisted with necessary (and some say strangely convenient) fund raising from pilgrimages which was needed to restore the monks' quarters and to build still more cathedral. In 1278 the bodies were reinterred and lie where they are today; King Edward I was said to have been in attendance at the occasion.
The ruin was overgrown and unattended when in 1934 the tombs were re-discovered. When the author says "recently discovered" if he means ~80 years ago = recent, perhaps his context comes from the fact that the foundations of the present ruin were laid by Saxons ~ 720 AD and St Patrick was supposed to have visited the earlier church there sometime in the early 5th century.
FReegards!
