Reclaiming Our History: the Myth of Britain’s “Dark Ages”

King Arthur’s Britain

Directed by Francis Pryor (2005)

Film Review

This is a series of three documentaries using modern archeological techniques to explode common myths we’re taught about the history of Britain and the “savages” who were allegedly “civilized” by the Romans and the Catholic church.

In Part 1, filmmakers challenge notions that Rome violently invaded and occupied Britain in 43 AD. Archeological remains suggest that early Britons (Celts) traded with Rome and became acquainted with their literature during the century preceded the alleged Roman invasion. It also appears ones of the British tribal kings requested Rome to send troops to protect him against enemy invaders. I was fascinated to learn that Gnosticism* persisted in Britain long after Constantine banned it (in 380 AD).

Part 2 disputes historical claims that British civilization and culture collapsed after Roman legions withdrew and the designation of the period 410 – 597 AD ad the “Dark Age. In 597 AD Pope Gregory sent St Augustine to England to convert the (Gnostic) Anglo Saxons to Christianity.

Part 3 challenges the myth of the Anglo Saxon invasion that allegedly occurred in the fifth century. Isotope analysis and a new technique called gradeometry suggest what really happened was a gradual assimilation of Germanic (primarily Fresian, Angle and Saxon) immigrants over the period 2,000 BC to 500 AD. The effect of this assimilation can also be seen in the Celtic influence over the development of the English language. The latter differs markedly from other Germanic languages. See Hidden History: The Myth of Anglo Saxon Purity


*Gnosticism refers to a collection of early pagan, Jewish and Christian beliefs which maintained that followers could instinctively experience the presence of God without the intermediation of a priesthood.

5 thoughts on “Reclaiming Our History: the Myth of Britain’s “Dark Ages”

  1. Fabulous shows. I like to speculate. Given the level of sophistication of that nation that was deliberately destroyed by the invading “Romans”, where might mankind have gone if the Brits had stayed on their own trajectory? Same with much of Europe – sophisticated nature based cultures deliberately destroyed by the “Romans”.

    Like

    • It’s hard to say, Christine. The more I study revisionist history, the more I’m impressed that most so-called invasions involve the substitution of one set of lords for another equally oppressive set of lords.

      Like

      • But that is not what actually happened, it is what they told us happened. It is part of the lie. It seems that most of the supposed invasions were not invasions at all. They were immigrations. The key to knowing this, is the existence of mitochondrial DNA as distinct from than paternal DNA. The analysis of DNA is going to re-write history completely, and PROVE that most of human history has been co-operative, not competitive.

        It is ONLY the “Roman” bloodline, with it’s many branches, that has the insatiable blood lust – and it has now conquered the world by coercing co-operative people to serve in its armies and otherwise do its bidding. It could only do that because they rest of us are co-operative, not competitive. We cannot resist cooperating with “them” also. We only join in their blood-lust when we are forced, and the prevalence of PTSD in returning troops proves that we do not do this naturally.

        This blood-lust is now being acted out in the corporate and business world, where competitiveness has been enforced over cooperation, with the winner takes all rewards going to those with the blood-lust (ie no conscience and a delight in hurting others). And even here it is proving to be “unnatural” for most of us. Companies have found that the more competitive they become, the less innovative they become. Innovation and cooperation are inseparable. If they want innovation and creativity in their organisations, they have to protect those people from the competitive, who destroy creativity in others. Once they have protected the innovative from the competitive, those people naturally start to work together in teams again, become supportive, share their ideas and inspirations, and most importantly, co-create. But they must be protected and insulated from the competitive environment around them.

        The “Roman” bloodline is the 1% of the population that is psychopathic, that actually lacks the capacity to feel for others and so be a social being. This is carried via the paternal DNA, but has been enhanced in recent times by the destruction of the pineal gland via fluoride in the water supply. The pineal gland holds our capacity to visualise and imagine, and probably controls our capacity to feel for others. Once calcified those higher human capacities are lost.

        So the speculation, for me, is how we would have evolved if the blood-lust race had not taken over the world, and the cooperative had dominated.

        Like

  2. Isn’t that sad, Kenneth. Especially when what passes for history in high school is so boring, Looking back, it was all propaganda. In my mind, that’s one of the worst aspects of propaganda – it’s repetitiveness just puts you to sleep.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.