Hey there. Been reading ahead through the GPC again, and I'm curious about this event.

I may have missed this in the book, but I don't think it was ever actually explained anywhere within. Who ordered for them to be sent away, and why? Was the intention for them to die in a storm, or were they supposed to safely arrive somewhere?

A few people on here have said Arthur asked Merlin to take the children to die, as he feared the prophecy about a child born in May killing his father. This doesn't work for a few reasons though - Arthur has no idea he begat a child upon Margause, it's uncharacteristic of him and Merlin to behave like that, and later, when Mordred reveals his parentage, Arthur makes no mention of the prophecy and is never concerned or suspicious about it, which wouldn't make sense if he tried to kill Mordred decades earlier to avoid being murdered by him.

There's also the matter of the letter to the pope that was with Mordred, which further implies by slandering Merlin that the children weren't placed on the boat by him either, and that they perhaps weren't even meant to become lost in the storm.

It's left me a bit confused, since I'm unsure who else is behind the entire affair. Didn't seem to be in the GM's secrets about the event anywhere.

Well, I haven't gotten to this point in the campaign yet so i don't know hoe Greg is handling this, but here's my take on it:

Nope. Arthur is a child killer because he fears Merlin's prophecy. At least that is the story according to Mallory - and we know how much Greg likes him.

Also, it is not at all uncharacteristic, Arthur does some pretty dumb stuff. Merlin as well, by the way - He gets himself trapped under a stone because he wants the Maidenhead of Nimue. And all that with full knowledge it will happen.

For reference, see Mallory's Le Morte D'Arthur Book 1, chapter 27.

Here is the text from Mallory:


CHAPTER XXVII. How all the children were sent for that were born on May-day, and how Mordred was saved.

THEN King Arthur let send for all the children born on May-day, begotten of lords and born of ladies; for Merlin told King Arthur that he that should destroy him should be born on May-day, wherefore he sent for them all, upon pain of death; and so there were found many lords' sons, and all were sent unto the king, and so was Mordred sent by King Lot's wife, and all were put in a ship to the sea, and some were four weeks old, and some less. And so by fortune the ship drave unto a castle, and was all to-riven, and destroyed the most part, save that Mordred was cast up, and a good man found him, and nourished him till he was fourteen year old, and then he brought him to the court, as it rehearseth afterward, toward the end of the Death of Arthur. So many lords and barons of this realm were displeased, for their children were so lost, and many put the wite on Merlin more than on Arthur; so what for dread and for love, they held their peace. But when the messenger came to King Rience, then was he wood out of measure, and purveyed him for a great host, as it rehearseth after in the book of Balin le Savage, that followeth next after, how by adventure Balin gat the sword.


Now, I don't particularly like this.
First of all, it is not limited to Lothian.
Secondly, it implies that Arthur can just order all noblemen (including the Queen of Lothian) to put their babies in Merlin's hands. Including those who are in rebellion against him at the time.
Thirdly, it makes Arthur role in this known and obvious, contradicting the Grey Knight adventure and so forth.

And of course, this results in a question of why Arthur doesn't do anything about it in 522 or afterwards.

On the other hand, we have Arthur's nightmares in 513 and his very public penance in 515.

My GPC-compliant reimaging would be this:
1. Merlin tells Arthur that one of the May Babies will destroy the kingdom when he grows up.
2. Arthur balks at killing babies, wanting no part of that.
3. Merlin suggests an alternative ploy, gathering the children and sending them away, so that they will grow up elsewhere and hence break the prophecy (he lies, of course). Arthur gives his grudging approval of that ploy.
4. Merlin (and Vivienne) gather up the children, no mention of Arthur's authorization.
5. Merlin arranges for the shipwreck, fully intending the children to perish, but with plausible deniability for all concerned.
6. Arthur, of course, blames himself for the (assumed) death of the children, hence his nightmares and penance. If he would have told Merlin NO this would not have happened.
7. When the May Babies return in 522, it is ten years later, and Arthur sees a chance to 'redeem his soul'. He never intended for the May Babies to be killed, and surely, the prophecy was broken by the 10 years absence from Britain, like Merlin implied that it would be? Arthur wants to believe this to be the case and since nothing happens for 30 years to imply that something is wrong, he probably forgets all about it. Merlin himself is not at court in 522 (he shows up briefly in 523 to say goodbye to Arthur), and perhaps he himself realizes that the prophecy cannot be altered.

in Malory's original, the "Suite de Merlin", the ship with Mordred on board that is wrecked is on its way to Arthur's court, transporting the babies from the north of Britain. The babies that do arrive are sent away in another boat to be found by a foreign ruler and raised in safety. (We don't know, unfortunately, whethe Malory deliberately changed the story to suggest a Herodian massacre or merely summarized it in a misleading way.)

Rosemary Morris, in her "The Character of King Arthur in Medieval Literature", pointed out (as have a couple of people here) that the drawback of Merlin's prophecy that starts this train of events is that it would be incredible for Arthur to leave Mordred in charge of his kingdom if that was so. (It doesn't help, either, that the later versions of the legend, including Malory, make Mordred openly and obviously evil even before Arthur entrusts him with the regency.) Of course, there are ways of getting around it. For example, Arthur might later on choose to forget the prophecy, maybe out of fear that if he accepts what Merlin said about Mordred, he might also have to accept what he said about Lancelot and Guinevere, or maybe out of guilt over the May Day Decree.

The aftermath of the Herodian massacre is harder to ignore; it would be surprising for the whole kingdom to forget such an event. (I suspect that Malory himself might have been less matter-of-fact about the likely consequences if he'd lived a few years longer and seen how the Princes in the Tower business brought Richard III's reign down.) Possibly the fact that the infamous King Rions with his beard-collecting ways is one of the leading rebels in the war brought about by the act keeps most of the nobles from rising up against Arthur altogether. Even the holy hermits during the Quest of the Holy Grail who speak so strongly about the knights of the Round Table's sins don't mention the May Day Decree. (No holy men confront Uther after the war with Gorlois over his actions towards the late Duke and Igraine, either, in the manner of Nathan rebuking David over the matter of Bathsheba and Uriah.)

Nice summary, merlyn.

And part of the decision is whether Merlin is the good Merlin, the neutral Merlin, or the bad Merlin. Think on these for a moment: King Lot has no problem with Merlin; King Ryons and Nero had no problem with Merlin. Most of the early notable knights had no problems with him. Yet, there are instances where Merlin prophecies bad things about the various events unfolding.

I hold the view that Merlin seeing the future realizes that the babies need to be removed. Yet, to simply kill them would be worse than removing them for a while. So, he takes the course that he does. It helps the future he wants and that is Arthur is the best choice for Britain.

So, sometimes Merlin is seen as the all-knowing, wise and benefactor of Uther/Arthur, and sometimes the betrayer as in the stealing of Arthur. My characters hated him, but also realized he was just too knowing to understand how the current events affected the future. And yes, I built that in early with a drop of prophecy here and there that I made sure came out according to what was said vs. what was done.

My game is not the same as anyone else on the board, yet I use what is printed as the basis of all.

When I ran this I cheated. It wasn't Merlin and Nineve that visited the kings of the north. They did tales of prophecies wrapped in glamour. However, when the dust settled, everyone knew it was not Arthur that ordered the event but many tried to leave it as his door. Many also thought it was certainly Merlin and Nineve that made the prophecies, even though they were at that time noticeably in the south.

So who was it? Morgan. In one of her first attempts at bringing Arthur down, she used the Herod story that the Glastonbury nuns told her to accomplish it. She convinced Morgause that Mordred would be kept save to be Arthur's heir.

Who was her ally? The one she used her glamour on to appear as Merlin? I just found a name from http://www.mythologydictionary.com/british-mythology.html that sounded good and used it....

I ran it as Merlin took it upon himself and with the help of the Lady of the Lake they stole the babies away and Arthur new nothing I played out Arthur's nightmares and penance as he was sorry for killing his own people!

Then when challenged and told about this he new nothing and turned to Merlin who kept quite and I serted and ran the grey night adventure for 515 and this incident took place at Cirencester the home of Duke Clarence!

Remember Merlin does what e wants when he wants and what he thinks is best for Britain even if he is wrong he wont admit it to anyone it is the devil in him coming out i say! thats how I run My version of Merlin as the Enchanter Arch Druid of Britain!