• 0 Replies

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


the watcher

  • Guest
« on: December 27, 2012, 11:26:05 PM »

 By Peter Mills MA PhD
I am prompted to write this article by a posting from our good patriot friend ?Enoch? in his response to the article ?The Indigenous English ? A Denial of Rights Conspiracy?.

?Enoch? quite rightly points out the following fact:-
??This is a quote from the BBC history website: 'Before Roman times Britain was just a geographical entity, and had no political meaning, and no single cultural identity.'
?Enoch? has highlighted such a common national ignorance of the actual history behind Romano-Celtic Britain that this subject urgently needs to be addressed in our schools.
The current teaching of our own native Celtic history is so biased and factually incorrect that it amounts to a politically-correct rewriting of history as was featured in George Orwell's novel "1984".
I have a degree in history from the University of Kent at Canterbury, and I would like to set out the true facts behind the actual creation of Britannia, the foundation of Britain.
Please bear in mind that I must be very short in this article, which could really be book-length if I were to include every relevant fact.
Put very simply indeed, this is what actually happened at the dawn of modern Britain.
The advent of the ?Romano-British? culture which developed during nearly 400 years of Roman government took place in a Celtic land, not a Roman land.
There were people living in Britain from the earliest times (?Cheddar Man? being a famous example).
From approximately the 3rd century BC, migrations of Celtic people from the Continent increased significantly. With them arrived the La T?ne artistic style, beautifully exemplified by the ?Battersea Shield? dredged from the Thames.
It is probable that these Celtic people brought with them the concept of the chariot.
Between about 150-100 BC further tribes migrated into southern Britain, the Belgae, a confederation of Celtic people whose tribal names are known to us.
Julius Caesar, appointed Governor of Roman Gaul in 58 BC, describes them in some detail in his surviving eyewitness accounts. During his campaigns to expand Gaul, Caesar became aware of what historian and archaeologist Sheppard Frere describes as ??the influence exerted by Britain on Gallic affairs.? (1)
When the Gaulish tribes of Armorica (the Brittany peninsula and Atlantic coast south of this) revolted against Caesar in 56 BC (see ?The Gallic War? [de Bello Gallico] by Julius Caesar) it is recorded that actual military assistance was given by the tribes in Britain to their cousins in Gaul, both on land and ? in the case of the sea battle in the Gulf of Morbihan ? with ships sailing from Britain to fight alongside the Gallic vessels against Caesar?s fleet.
The Greek writer Strabo (c.64 BC- 24 AD) records that one of the main motives of the Celtic Confederation of Gaul and Britain in challenging Caesar on land and sea was their fear that Caesar might extend his military campaigning over the Channel into Britain, thereby wrecking havoc with the flow of commerce between Britain and Gaul and thus disrupting the economies of the Celtic kingdoms on both sides of the Channel.
Caesar himself confirms that the Celtic king Divitiacus who ruled the Suessiones (giving their name to Soissons 62 miles from Paris) also ruled a kingdom of his people in Britain.
In 57 BC, chieftains of the Celtic Bellovaci (the Belgic tribe from whom Beauvais north of Paris is named) fled to Britain and sought political asylum in their tribe?s kingdom in south-east Britain.
Caesar ? not a man to be challenged in his ambitions ? saw clearly that the Celts of Britain were political allies of the Celts of Gaul. He knew the British Celts were defying him by granting asylum to his enemies and by sending troops across the Channel to fight alongside the rebels.
He knew that Gaul and Britain thrived on their mutual cross-Channel trade. And after Caesar?s Roman fleet had defeated the Celtic fleet, Caesar also saw that he just happened to have a large number of ships handy near the Channel?
Accordingly, Julius Caesar made two punitive expeditions into Britain, on 26th August 55 BC and in the first week of July 54 BC.
On his second visit, a gigantic operation involving some 600 specially designed transport ships and 28 protective warships, carrying five legions and two thousand cavalry, Caesar defeated what is described as ??the Belgic (i.e. Celtic) Confederacy which opposed him.?(2)
Contrary to general public opinion, Julius Caesar?s campaigns in Britain were never intended to represent an attempt to conquer the island, they were Caesar?s militarily-backed political demonstration that Celtic Britain no longer provided a safe refuge for his defiant enemies fleeing Celtic Gaul.
These historical facts surely, I submit, hardly describe ??just a geographical entity, (which) had no political meaning, and no single cultural identity? as is ridiculously and totally inaccurately claimed by the BBC history website!
It is more than apparent that in the case of British history, as in the case of present-day news broadcasting, if one wishes to understand the actual truth, one should avoid believing the politically motivated BBC at all costs.
(1) Britannia, 1967, Routledge & Keegan Paul, ISBN 0 351 16310 7
(2) As above.

Share this topic...
In a forum
In a site/blog

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk