The Riddle of Prehistoric Britain

The Riddle of Prehistoric Britain


AS this philosophical study envisages an entirely new outlook on the past history of the world in which the British Isles emerge as the predominant influence, I owe it to the reader to afford some explanation of how I came to venture so ambitious an effort.

Over thirty years ago I must confess that I stumbled rather than deliberately walked into a recognition that the history of remote days as passed down was based on false premises in regard to the most famous ancient peoples, both in regard to geography and chronology. I was brought to the conviction that the Atlantic and not the Mediterranean was the focus of world civilization, and as I pursued my researches I found to my own astonishment that this path led me ultimately to the direction of the British Isles, and that they, with the Scandinavian Peninsula—originally itself an island—emerged from obscurity as the true motherland of the Aryan or Nordic race, the biblical Adamites, and dominated the ancient world long before the Flood of Noah.

My investigations had started with the puzzle of the drowning of the supposedly lost island of Atlantis, but as the search continued with an open mind gradually the quest narrowed to one infinitely nearer home, and eventually assumed the proportions which Plato ascribed to it as an island-continent from whence the “continent opposite”—namely America—was approached by the way of islands. “Atlantis”, in a word, stood revealed as the British Islands, then of considerably greater size apart from Scandinavia, with her attendant isles, enjoying a delicious temperate clime, from whence was evolved the first of mankind, signifying the white blond race, the Aryan peoples, from whom the Greeks and other Celts—who migrated in part to the Mediterranean later –first arose. Atlantis was drawn in one way or another into the vortex of the earliest Graeco-Phoenician myths of Oceanus, of the “earth-shaker” Poseidon, the Gorgon, the Cyclops and others, all for definite reasons pointing to the North Atlantic Ocean. This, if correct, rules out the Canaries or Azores (as some have identified With Atlantis), or the regions of Morocco where the so-called Atlas Mountains are. a misnomer altogether, but advances the British Isles and the Scandinavian mass, formerly at one with Northern Britain or separated only by a wide river and strait. In short, for a variety of reasons I was impelled to identify Atlantis with the British Isles.

It transpired that the prehistory of the Atlanteans and the race of Adam possessed peculiar similarities. The supermen of Plato’s island were drowned in a flood like the Adamites, the Giants of old time, men of renown, the men whose thoughts became wholly evil, destroyed in what is called the Flood or universal Deluge. The cause advanced for their destruction was in effect the same in both cases, they being accused of having mastered too many of the divine secrets of, as we should say, science, or as the ancients termed it, the gods.

Their attainments, identifiable at least in part from various sources, gradually revealed a remarkable civilization, one in which flourished many and great walled cities, towns and villages, these often adorned with majestic temples and palaces ; with main highways supported by multitudinous navigable canals and rivers ; with a highly developed agriculture producing the fruits of the earth, while other tracts were used to rear horses, cattle, and sheep ; with many ports and a mercantile marine which sailed the main to the most distant lands and brought home cargoes of wealth.

The Medieval New England On The Black Sea

The Medieval New England On The Black Sea

ALTHOUGH THE NAME ‘NEW ENGLAND’ IS NOW FIRMLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE EAST COAST OF AMERICA, This is not the first place to be called that. In the medieval period there was another Nova Anglia, ‘New England’, and it lay far to the east of England, rather than to the west, in the area of the Crimean peninsula.

The following post examines some of the evidence relating to this colony, which was said to have been established by Anglo-Saxon exiles after the Norman conquest of 1066 and seems to have survived at least as late as the thirteenth century.

The evidence for a significant English element in the Varangian Guard of the medieval Byzantine emperors has been discussed on a number of

occasions. The Varangian Guard was the personal bodyguard of the Byzantine emperor from the time of Basil II (976–1025), founded to provide the emperor with a trustworthy force that was uninvolved in the internal politics of the Byzantine Empire and thus could be relied on in times of civil unrest.

Whilst initially made up of Russ from Kiev, with Scandinavian warriors subsequently forming an important part of the guard through the eleventh century, from the late eleventh century onwards it had a significant English component too. Indeed, the ‘English Varangians’ appear to have continued to constitute a high proportion of the Varangian Guard right through the twelfth century and up until the siege of Constantinople in 1204, during the Fourth Crusade.

This is, in itself, of considerable interest, but even more intriguing is the question of why substantial numbers of English warriors entered the Varangian Guard in the later eleventh century, for the answer to this is thought to lie in a number of sources that indicate that there was, in fact, a sizeable emigration of Anglo-Saxons from England to Constantinople in the aftermath of the Norman Conquest of 1066.

The Real St. George

The Real St. George

THE OTHER TRADITIONAL ACTIONS OF JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA were to give to British King Gweirydd or George, the white flag surmounted by the red crown which is still the flag of England today, and then to receive a land grant from the King George upon which he founded Glastonbury[1].

As George is almost certainly the well-recorded British King Gweirydd there may be some truth in this, and as the original Glastenic (Glaston near Bury) was at Atherton in the English Midlands that were Gweirydd’s territories where it is still eminently traceable even today, the story is well founded.

If we add in the fact that Joseph of Arimathea was known in Khumric as St Ilid, and he served as the chaplain to the young prince Bran, a great grandson of King Caradoc I. and father of King Caradoc II. At Trefran and Llanilid, some eighteen miles west of Cardiff, there is a clear geographical scenario emerging.

The British East India Company, The American Revolution, And a Whole Lot More

The British East India Company, The American Revolution, And a Whole Lot More

MILES HAS STATED THE BRITISH EAST INDIA COMPANY SUPPORTED THE COLONISTS DURING THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION. This point made my head spin initially, as I was taught the colonists rebelled against everything British, especially the EIC and its despised tea.

While researching the basis for Miles’ claim, I not only realized he was correct, but discovered a new way of understanding the Revolution, which I share in this paper. First, here’s the relevant section from Miles’ paper on Thomas Jefferson:

The revolution] succeeded because the East India Company and other powerful entities supported it .. Not because of any solidarity or fellow feeling, but because the EIC felt it would be easier to negotiate with and dominate a fledgling country like the US than an old powerhouse like England. In fact, the EIC had already infiltrated the colonies thoroughly, and mostly owned them, so the American Revolution was more a war over ownership between England and the EIC, or two arms of the aristocracy, than between England and the colonies[1].

The English Revolution

The English Revolution

THERE IS OF COURSE NO DISPUTE THAT KING CHARLES I OF ENGLAND WAS EXECUTED by being beheaded at the scaffold erected outside the Guildhall in the City of London in January 1649.  However, the events that led to his execution, as is often the case with many historical events have been twisted to fit the sanitised version of history that is always presented to the masses by our ruling Elite, in order to conceal the real truth.

“It was fated that England should be the first of a series of Revolutions, which is not yet finished.”  Isaac Disraeli, father of Benjamin Disraeli, former British Prime Minister, 1851

In London in the latter years of the decade of the 1630’s, immediately prior to the English Revolution now more expediently known as the ‘English Civil War’, there were many minor, armed uprisings of the ‘people’, usually involving the same ringleaders and ‘agents provocateurs’, as is often the case today.  These armed ‘mobs’ caused panic and fear in the streets wherever they went, including the sometimes-violent intimidation they inflicted upon members of both houses of Parliament.

This in fact was a very similar modus operandus as that employed by the ‘Sacred Bands’ and the ‘Marseillaise’ of the French revolution 150 years later.  Indeed, the striking similarities between the two events are most noteworthy.

There were illegal print operations being instigated all around the city, producing inflammatory leaflets inciting the good citizens of London to revolt against the ruling powers that be.

How England Got its Name

How England Got its Name

The creation of a new ethnic identity of the English people was one of the most important developments of the later Anglo-Saxon period from the ninth to the eleventh centuries. Five centuries earlier, there had been no political or linguistic unity among the different peoples of German / Danish origin who had settled in the country and who spoke different dialects and were ruled by a handful of small tribal kingdoms. Then, from the reign of King Alfred onwards, Scandinavian invasions and the rise of dynasty of Wessex gradually led to the emergence of a single kingdom controlling most of the land and population, and to the belief that the English constituted a single community bound together by common descent, cultural tradition, language, church and loyalty to the king.

In the later stages of this development, around 1000 AD, a new name, Engla land, came to be attached to the kingdom of the English and it has lasted until the present day as one of the most famous and long-lived country names in European history.

Several historians from the later tenth to twelfth centuries called attention to this in their writings, so there has never been any question about the approximate date when it took place. The earliest of these was the late tenth century Latin chronicler Aethelweard of Wessex. After looking into the continental origins of the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes, he notes that the land earlier called Britannia had taken its present name Anglia from one of the victorious invaders, the Angli: (Britannia is now called Anglia, taking the name of the victors).

The Night of The Long Knives At Amesbury 1st May 472

The Night of The Long Knives At Amesbury 1st May 472

ON THE 1ST MAY 472 THE SAXON HENGIST MASSACRED ALL BUT ONE of Britain’s Celtic chiefs in an ambush that became known as the ‘Night of the Long Knives’. Possibly.

The massacre may not have actually happened, and if it did, there’s every chance it wasn’t on that particular date – I’ve gone into more detail about the date of the Night of the Long Knives below – so please take the following with a large pinch of salt!

The Original ‘Night of the Long Knives’

The Saxon Hengist is ‘a real historical figure’. He is mentioned by Bede[2], and by the authors of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles – historical sources who are generally seen as being reliable[3].


Early London

Early London

1. Introduction

THE COMMENT IN THE TWENTY-NINTH CHAPTER OF THE BOOK OF ACTS in the Turkish Archives at Istanbul (formerly Constantinople), about the arrival of St. Paul in Britain at the Port of Raphinus and his preaching in their city upon “Mount Lud”, (Ref. 1 – p 141), is interesting as it takes one back to the foundation and early history of London.

Gordon (Ref. 2) and Waddell (Ref.3) both rely on Nennius and Geoffrey of Monmouth for their information. Gordon also uses information from the works of the Welsh scholar and bard, R. W. Morgan, and particularly refers to his “History of the Kymri”.(Ref. 2 – p 85 & 106).

2. Prehistoric London

Gordon (Ref. 2 – p 6) shows the plan of the prehistoric London mounds. Two of the mounds are artificially constructed. One was known as Bryn Gwyn, the white or holy mound, and the White Tower of London was built on this site. The other was Tot Hill meaning the sacred mound. Both of these mounds are close to the Thames.

Four miles north east of St. Paul’s Cathedral there is a hill which was known as “LIandin”, a sacred or lake eminence, known today as Parliament Hill standing 322 feet high.(Ref. 2 – p 7/8). On the north eastern slope of this hill is a stone monument on which it states public speaking is allowed. It appears that since “time immemorial ” this hill has been used for numerous meetings both religious and political, either on the hill or on “Parliament Fields ” at its base. (Ref. 2 – p 110).

Kings of Britain

Kings of Britain

THERE IS NOTHING MORE FRUSTRATING THAN PICKING UP ANY HISTORICAL BOOK ABOUT BRITAIN and reading nothing more than Roman crap and bullshit. When it comes to British history some have a great failing in as much as nothing happened before the Romans arrived. No one really lived here according To some historians and academics except a few tribes called Celts.

The thing is when it comes to British History, producer of a popular archaeological program knows absolutely nothing about British History or the Kings that Ruled the country long before the Romans came.

Why is it that whenever they are on one of these digs and they come across an old church they automatically assumes that it is either Roman or Anglo Saxon?

On Sunday January the 25th 2004 they aired a program digging up skeletons.

Anglo Saxon women were noted as being small yet they came across a woman who at first they believed to be 6 foot tall and buried with a shield and a dagger.

Automatically they assume she was and Anglo Saxon, not even considering that she could have been British and was maybe part of the Boadacea rebellion. Did they do forensic tests on the actual bones they found? Maybe they didn’t even do a carbon 14 test to find out the age of the bones.
I very much doubt it. I cant say for sure myself, but Boadacea did poison herself or used an adder to strike the final blow after being defeated by the Romans in her last battle that almost destroyed the entire Roman army in Britain.

The Ancient British Coelbren Alphabet

The Ancient British Coelbren Alphabet

THE TRACING OF THE ANCIENT BRITISH ORIGINS can be accomplished with great certainty and the tool or weapon that allows us to trace our ancestral roots is the ancient British Alphabet and Language.

In 1846 Austin Layard discovered the archives of the ancient Assyrian Emperors’ in the ruins of Nineveh.

He boxed up over 25,000 baked tablets upon which these records were written and sent them to the British Museum in London.

There some surprised staff saw that some of these ancient backed clay tablets from around 740-620 BC were inscribed in the Old British Alphabet.

This provided a link between Ancient Britain and Ancient Assyrian Iran going back over 2700 years ago.

Khumric writers publishing in AD 1797 and 1848 in 1852 and in 1906 all pointed to the near identical ancient British Coelbren Alphabet and the alleged indecipherable alphabets of the Ancient Britain Etruscan(Italy), Rhaetian (Switzerland), and Pelasgian-Aegean and Asia Minor.