|
These people seem to have been
the sole occupants of Albion or 'Albania' until about 2800BC. ('Ala'
means 'place of settlement' in Estonian, 'ban' is clearly a Celtic
pronunciation of 'van'). The beginning of the 3rd millenium BC saw
the arrival of the first of the Phoenician metal miners and, as a
result of their solar worship, the construction of the great solar
temples such as Callanish, Avebury and Stonehenge. These sites are
all close to old mine workings.
Any surviving inscriptions from
those times had to be carved in stone and even literary masons liked
to take short cuts. Wherever there was an inherent short vowel
present when you pronounced a consonant it was omitted from the
inscription. An example in English might be 'LK' which could be
understood as 'Elkie' or 'NRG' for 'energy'.
Early references to Britons seem
to start as 'PRT', (Newton Stone, Don Valley, approximately 1100BC)
which leaves us to figure out whether the intended word is p*rt,
p*r*t, pr*t or even p......! When the Celts arrived 500 years later
they registered the word in a form more familiar to us although not
necessarily true to the original Trojan. In their tongue it becomes
'b' for 'p' and often 'd' for 't'. Thus we get b*rd or 'b*rt';
'b*r*t' or 'p*r*t' and 'br*t' or 'pr*t'.
Hopefully we can now decipher the
names of our ancestors through the linguistic mists of time. Pretani,
Brutus, Perth, Brude, Parati, Parisi, Parthiani, Pratt and a host of
others may be derived relatives. Alban thus became Pretannia and
Britannia thereafter. Ironically the Scots Gaels, perhaps unwittingly
respectful of the aboriginal language, still pronounce 'Alba' as
'ala-pa'. They are thus respectful of the syllable meaning
settlement, 'ala', whilst being less than respectful to the name of
the people who did the original settling, the Vans.
By the time Hamilcar the
Carthaginian had cruised past the islands in the middle of the first
millenium BC the transition from a Van name to a Brutish Trojan name
was complete. Only in the North did the names Alban and Kaledonia
survive from the aboriginal settlers, although there is Roman record
of Caledonian forests outside London. This is a whole subject in
itself but Professor L A Waddell is good on this topic.
The Newton stone seems to
indicate that the Scots were the Phoenician Goths with Trojan
connections and as such a branch of the Parati whose goddess was
Diana, depicted much as Britannia is at present. They were sea rovers
and traders and the heraldry of the West Coast clans seems to support
this. Links are suggested to the Gaddites, Hittites and Scythians who
were also known as the Skuti. Scythian origin is claimed in the
Declaration of Arbroath of 1320.
The Angles, on the other hand are
not recorded as reaching the Pretannic isles until 449AD when they
were invited here by a King of the Britons called Vortigern. Often
condemned as traitor to British Christian decency Vortigern hired the
pagan 'Anglii' pirates to alleviate problems he was having with the
Picts (all unconquered North Britons) and the Scots (settled Paddy
pirates). They were making joint raids into the Romanised province of
Britannia from the north of the walls in the winter.
The Anglii originated from the
Schleswick-Holstein area around the present border between Germany
and Denmark. They are first recorded in history by Tacitus in 98AD in
the 'Germania' who describes them as one of a group of river dwelling
tribes having "nothing individually noteworthy" (Chap.40)
but having in common worship of the goddess Nerthia, who visited them
annually from an off-shore island. (Tax haven?)
However the Anglii, along with
the Jutes and Saxons were thoroughly dissuaded from wandering
northwards and although not having been able to complete the task
they lingered with Vortigern demanding their mercenary dues.
Vortigern was no match for the professional thuggery of Hengist and
Horsa, one of whom became his son-in-law overnight, and they had soon
squatted his lush middle Britain pastures. They then spent the next
400 years or so killing off the Britons and attempting to expand in
all directions until two peoples checked their extravagances.
In 685AD the Anglian army was
slaughtered to a man at Dunnichen near Letham in Angus by the Picts,
or Caledonian Britons. One of the conditions enforced by the
victorious Brude was that the Angles desisted from crossing Hadrian's
Wall. In 865AD they were subjected to a dose of their own medicine by
the Danes who pillaged and annexed Angleland as a Danish colony. In
1042 King Cnut was succeeded by Edward the Confessor who left a weak
and disputed monarchy. 1066 saw the arrival of another set of
Norsemen via France and Angleland was under foreign control yet again.
The 'English' were thus
resurrected, some might say in name only, and the population of
surviving Britons, Angles and Saxons was controlled by the French
royal house of Plantagenet. The 'Houses' of Lancaster, York and the
Tudors followed. In 1603, following sectarian divisions, they ran out
of acceptable monarchs and had to invite James VI of Scotland down to
rule them. 60 years later they were in trouble again and invited the
heirs to the House of Hanover, William and Mary, over from Germany
long to rule over them. The Teutonic invasion and annexation of
Celtic Britain was thus complete.
In the 1689 Bill of Rights
sovereignty was taken from the people of England and accorded to
Parliament. The monarch, previously the personification of the
people's sovereign authority, was reduced to what they called a
'constitutional' role, a meaningless term but in practice effectively redundant.
In 1701 the English parliament
passed the Act of Settlement whereby the succession of the English
throne was fixed on the House of Hanover forever, true to the country
of origin.
In 1706 the Hanoverian Queen
Anne, blissfully unaware that she enjoyed no sovereign authority from
the People of Scotland commissioned the enacting of a union. This
resulted in the 1706 Act of Union which when combined with the 1707
Act of Union in Scotland led her to believe that she had created a
treaty. The so-called Treaty of Union is purely notional. No such
document exists. There are no signatories. It is a paranoid
Hanoverian fantasy.
The other sovereign party in the
deal was not consulted. When the Scottish People heard the proposed
terms they burned the drafts in the streets of Edinburgh and several
other towns in Scotland. The 'British' constitution thus has little
to do with the Britons. The new name chosen for the unlawfully united
kingdoms was also offensive. The murdering German boot-boys chose
'Great Britain' and have hidden their true identity behind the good
reputation of their victims ever since.
 
The ignorance and arrogance
displayed by Westminster toward its sovereign partner, however
unwilling, continues today. The Scotland Act 1998 speaks of
sovereignty remaining at Westminster as if it were the only
sovereignty in existence. Tony Blair has declared that sovereignty
resides with him as Prime Minister. As far as the English
constitution is concerned he is technically correct but the Scots
elect their monarch as King or Queen of Scots.
That title is not granted even to
Queen Elizabeth II of England, far less someone heading an English
political party. 'Partyism' as such is an English invention derived
from the need to manage the excesses of a newly sovereign parliament.
It is unconstitutional in Scotland, where you cannot serve two
masters and the People are paramount. No-one north of Hadrian's Wall
can remember provision for an English 'Prime Minister' in the Act of Union. |
