Видео

Hi Caleb, I love your channel and I agree with the Minoan hypothesis. However, one striking feature Plato mentioned that puzzles me is that he said that one of the regions that Atlantis ruled over was Gades, the modern day island of Cadiz, Spain. That makes one assume that the island of Atlantis in fact faced the Straits of Gibraltar. So if Atlantis was the Minoans, I guess it's possible that they had dominion over the coast of Spain, so it might have seeemed like they were coming from an island in the Atlantic ocean. Either that or this could be entirely a work of fiction, at least the location was, and Plato simply drew inspiration from the Minoans, much like Bram Stoker drew inspiration from the historical ruler Vlad Dracula for his book, Dracula. What are your thoughts on this problem with the theory?

Finally, someone who has some common sense about Atlantis. I agree with you, the Minoans were in fact the Atlanteans, or at least the story written by Plato was inspired by them.

I thought that this would only be about St Samson as he can roughly be dated to the Third Church Council held in Paris around 557AD (other dates maybe available) under king Childebert. ‘Samson peccator episcopus’ who in 557 (or 555) signed the decrees of the council of Paris, I assume this is a claim and that the actual signed paperwork no longer exists?

Great video. I am in the middle of trying to cross reference these sources myself. In Gildas, he says that the battle of Badon was 44 years and 1 month after the arrival of the Saxons. He had previously explained how the Saxons had been invited by Vortigern. I am paraphrasing here because I don't have the text to hand, but wouldn't this suggest an earlier chronology for Arthur than what you have suggested? I'm sure that you have addressed this already, but interested in your thoughts as it is fresh in the mind.

Was Francus a real person? Was Brutus part of a larger movement? Since Romans considered themselves descendants of Trojans couldn’t Brutus be considered as Roman?

You do great research. Do you realize that you cherry picked to research only "white history"? That spreads racism.

ou do great research. Do you realize that you cherry picked to research only "white history"? That spreads racism. Arthur was a myth. Why not focus some time on the actual historicity, and not just white myths.

ou do great research. Do you realize that you cherry picked to research only "white history"? That spreads racism.

You do great research. Do you realize that you cherry picked to research only "white history"? That spreads racism.

the Trojan War it was a war between Albanians. tell people the truth, rather a lie.Oh, I forgot: where is Troy today🤔🤔🤔,what does the word Troy mean?

So in the video, you disount Riothamus as Arthur because Geof of Monmouth said Arthur conquered Gaul and we know that Riothamus lost. But, are there any other historical accounts of any King conquering all of Gaul in the manner GoM attributes to Arthur? If not, then you are essentially saying that GoM invented a heroic fictional victory, and then using a fictional victory as pŕoof that Riothamus cannot be Arthur. So, if GoM's account is not verifiable, then why isn't it possible that he simply turned a loss into a victory to make the hero more acclaimed? Which would be more logical, complete fabrication or simple engrandizement?

Tewdrig, King of Gwent & Glywysing who is my 46th great-grandfather and i are darn near identical in looks

Athrwys King of Glywyssing & Gwent is my 44h great grandfather his grandfather St. Tewdrig, King of Gwent & Glywysing who is my 46th great-grandfather and i are darn near identical in looks And Athrwys and my twin sons are identical

St kilda could also match the paradise of birds description although longer leg to iceland

Hmm, the Etruscans foundation legend says they came from Anatolia, dna says they had Steppe ancestry, Scythian elements such as Amazons fought with the Trojans allegedly. So would Iranic influences be possible. Horse, chariots and burial mounds? Missletoe does not grow on our oaks without grafting but it does on caucasian evergreen oaks

Cadmus is also mentioned in the bible along with Solomon. This video goes into great detail. ruclips.net/video/f6jXYu_cDXo/видео.htmlsi=ttfdvo_o9rVQLr7h

Also Martin Liedtke has done some great research over@ FlatEarthBritish channel, he lives in Wales so boots on the ground& another great resource

Next time you come to these parts gimme a shout im local& lots of local info

Nonsense. The true ocean referred to by Plato (through Timaeus) is the Pacific Ocean.

Iomramh Maoile Dhúin

Iomramh Maoile Dhúin

Your contention that Trojans weren’t Israelite is mostly focused on refuting a hypothesis by a single man rather than the conventional understanding. You argue that there is no connection between Troy and the Khumri/Cimmerians/Gimiri, so Israelite descent is invalid. This assumes that the only way Israelites could have assimilated into Trojans was through post-Assyrian-Captivity exiles. However, most of us believe that a contingent of Pre-Exodus Israelites sailed from Egypt alongside Darda and settled Troy nearly half a millennium prior to the Assyrian Captivity. In reality, if the Welsh descend from Israelites, it is not necessarily through the Gimiri or Khumri (thus providing an explanation for the name Cymry), but through a separate offshoot of Israelites who have no lineal connection to the Post-Captivity Bit-Khumri. Also, you are correct that the Gimiri are direct predecessors of the Cimmerians and are initially distinct from the Bit-Khumri, but they later absorb Israelite exiles, as evident through Biblical prophecy. The Gimiri were sons of Gomer, son of Japheth, whose bloodline was prophesied to dwell in the tents of Shem (Genesis 9:27). These are the same tents from Hosea 12:9, which tells Israelite exiles in the wilderness will be dwelling in tents (this is evidently outside the borders of Babylon/Armenia, as per Amos 4:1-3, Amos 5:25-27, Acts 7:43). Isaiah 54:2-3 tells that these tents will expand, with Israel conquering nations and settling in their enemies lands. Micah 5:7-9 also tells that throughout the Israelite migration, they will be decimating their enemies. So to identify Israel from the 8th century BC onward, we must locate a martially dominant nomadic tribe that dwells in tents beyond the civilizations of West Asia (in Anatolia, the Balkans, Scythia, and Iran). This matches the Cimmerians quite well, especially considering they branch from the exact region in which the Bit-Khumri Israelites were exiled. Lastly, Isaiah 10:12-22 implies that Israelite exiles will destroy the Assyrians, and it was the Cimmerians, Scythians, Mannaeans and Medes who destroyed Assyria. There is also a plethora of genetic, archaeological, prophetic, and heraldic/symbolic evidence for a linkage between Israel and the British (B’rit = Covenant in Hebrew, Ish = Men or People in Hebrew). But aside from your critique on the Israelites, your work is very interesting. I saw you speaking to Adam about Troy, and I love that topic, so Im going to check out the rest of your content. God bless!

Very good points. I’m not sure why Athrwys ap Meurig doesn’t generate more interest as an originator of the Arthurian legend. He is a British king with a similar name that could have morphed into Arthur when translated from welsh to Latin to English. He lived in the time period and in one of the places where the earliest Arthurian legends are set. I find it particularly compelling that he ruled from Caerleon where Geoffrey of Monmouth who created the Arthurian legend as we know it had Arthur ruling. It seems likely that since Geoffrey was from South Wales he would have known of Athrwys and used them as the basis for his story. I think it would be quite a coincidence if Athrwys was not the basis of the legendary Arthur. For me the question of whether or not their was a historic King Arthur is not a question of whether or not one person fulfills all the things the legendary Arthur is said to have done, but whether there was a real person whose life could have inspired the stories and are whom the legends could gather. I don’t think Ambrosius Aurelianus was that person because although he was the likely leader at Badon he doesn’t explain where the name Arthur or the associations with Caerleon would have come from. Athrwys is the most likely candidate for being the real person that much of the early legends are based on.

There is, in certain circles, a belief that Arthur was based on a British warrior named Owain Dant Gwyn or Howell Dant Gwyn who was based at the Roman city of Viraconium Cornovii, modern day Wroxeter just outside of Shrewsbury. Bear in mind that most battles attributed to Arthur were fought in the north of Britain.

Interesting ideas, I like where you are headed! One thing to consider, the Pillars of Heracles being located at Gibraltar ultimately comes from the Phoenicians who were the first to associate that area with Melqart. The Greeks adopted this concept of “Pillars” from the Phoenicians, so I am of the opinion that it is the Phoenicians that we should look to, and not pay much attention to the Greek idea of “Heracles” when it comes to the Pillars specifically. (Especially if we are to assume that this was originally an Egyptian story.) The Phoenician tradition started in Tyre with Temples of Melqart containing “Pillars of Melqart”. Herodotus visited Tyre around 450 BC and found the temple of Melqart richly adorned with a number of offerings, among which were two pillars, one of pure gold, the other of emerald, shining with great brilliancy at night. Each successive Temple of Melqart had their own pillars as they expanded westward. such as the Cippi votive pillars dedicated to Melqart at Malta, and later, the definitive Phoenician Temple of Hercules Gaditanus which is where the Gibraltar Pillars tradition ultimately came from. The Greeks had their own earlier traditions of narrow straits, such as the Clashing rocks, and Charybdis and Scylla (which the oldest Greek sources place in the Bosporus strait before it later “moved” to Sicily, probably in relation to the Chalybe people on the Anatolian side, and the Scythians on the European side). This part is my own speculation, but with the Greek’s tendency to literally move the goalposts of these types of straits, I would not be surprised if the geographic location of the strait of Gibraltar as another type of “clashing rocks” becoming conflated with the famous pillars in the Phoenician Temple of Hercules Gaditanus. Only later on to become the Roman concept of the strait of Gibraltar being the definitive and final “Pillars of Heracles” we all are familiar with. Finally, I think this is an important distinction to understand that the Mediterranean Phoenicians and the Mycenaeans probably shared the same Minoan culture at one point, and they only became Phoenician and Mycenaean (and later Greek) afterwards. The further back you go into the Minoan period you see that they were producing Tyrian Purple before the Phoenicians. You find Minoan era purple dye sites on Crete itself, and places like modern day Island of Koufonisia, formerly called Leuke, which seems to indicate that the technology for producing the dye originated with the Minoans. This later went to the Phoenicians, being lost by the Mycenaean part of the Minoan world. The mythological origin of Tyrian Purple, with Heracles and his Dog walking the beach (the story has been associated with Melqart), and the dog biting the snail to get a purple mouth also ties Melqart/Heracles to this Minoan era development. Samson from the Bible with his pillars should be considered for greater context. Lucian of Samosata wrote that those sacrificing to Melqart had to shave their heads, which may explain the ritual razors found in many Carthaginian tombs. Contrast this with the story of invincible King Nisus and his lock of purple hair who King Minos waged war against. Once that purple lock was cut, Nisus lost his power and was quickly defeated. One version tells of Nisus turning into an Eagle, which has some interesting parallels with the later founding of Tyre. “Originally the island was not attached to the sea floor, but rose and fell with the waves. An Olive tree of the goddess Ashtart rose there, protected by a curtain of Flames. A snake was wrapped around its trunk and an eagle was perched in it. It was predicted that the island would cease floating when the bird was sacrificed to the gods. The god Melqart taught people how to build boats, then sailed to the island. The eagle offered itself, and Sur became attached to the sea floor. Since then, the gods have never stopped living there...” Tyre is not Atlantis, but the founding mythos of Phoenician Tyre points at an older repurposed Aegean tradition, with Tyre’s origin as a floating island much like the floating island of Delos.

Having watched and enjoyed many of your videos, I have recently started reading your "King Arthur" book. I am interested in following this up by reading Gildas. Is there a particular edition of "On the Ruin of Britain" that you can recommend, preferably one currently in print in Britain? Thanks.

Hello from Nashville, I've just discovered your youtube channel and ordered one of your books. I've read a number of books by Wilson and Blackett and was in email contact with Ross Broadstock before he died. I mourn the passing of Ross as well as Wilson and Blackett. I've also exchanged emails with Marchell Abrahams, and one thing I found was that it's not easy to offer counter arguments to some of their closely held opinions. One of the last things I brought up with Ross was the undisputed fact that the Great Comet appeared in 536 not 562. I don't remember getting very far with that, probably because it upsets the Wilson and Blackett timeline for the life of Arthur II. They also seem a bit unreasonable in their contention that Rome never really conquered much of Britain. Ross was, however, leaning my way in my belief that the Kolbrin so-called Bible is authentic, even if the history in it is more lore and legend than fact. By the way, if you like American History, I have an ebook on Amazon called Dixie Flyer:1919. Best regards, Terry Baker

I don't know if it's in your scope but what is the Wallace Volcae tribe connection?

You can look up the research paper : 'Iranian Roots of the Legends of King Arthur' by K. Arthur

Fantastic job.👋

It would appear that he is out first and foremost to discredit you. Obviously this is because he doesn't agree with your hypothesis, which is worrying (from an academic point of view) as he seems to be prepared to fabricate in order to do this. I can only assume that he does not have a constructive argument against it that will stand on its own merit.

Interesting. It is a common trend these days, isn't it, for people to be "not open to any agreement, headstrong, puffed up with pride" etc. It is disappointing when people double down on their mistaken notions after being corrected - it shows a blatant lack of interest in accuracy of information. We see it in Biblical Archaeology constantly in that, despite so many discoveries continually coming to light that support the Biblical narrative, there's this very strange eagerness to try and diminish their importance or attack another aspect of the appertaining narratives that have not yet been illuminated by archaeological discoveries.

Totally understand, you have no comebacks, to contributors ( or website owners) for these "pedia stuff/info" that are or appear to be wrong, they will not accept this so won't change the info

Whatre your thoughts on "Atlantis and the Silver City by Peter Daughtrey", whereby he uses the '100 clues' given by Plato. Also have you any clues to the name of the actual place, as my understanding, is that Solon spoke to the Priests of Sais, who had an oral history, an Solon befriended them an was told about this place but Grecafied it as 'Atlantis'! The Priests of Sais also told Solon, something like " you Greeks are but babes you only remember one flood an have forgotten the other three"!

Of course they did. Where do we think potatoes came from?

@calebhowells1116 I appreciate your attempt to locate Atlantis inside the Pillars of Heracles but are you not just twisting the words to mean what you want them to mean? Try and dislodge Randall Carson's description of the location of Atlantis.

No.

Caleb Howells has a 'degree' from the United States Institute of Language and Clerical Studies. The historian he calls Cecius must be Ctesias of Cnidus, physician to the Persian king Artaxerxes II. As a doctor he was probably reliable; as an historian, less so.

@calebhowells1116 Fascinating and thank you for uploading the video! Nice tease for the next video too. 😜 The second half of this felt like one long Eureka! moment, especially the notes on the word "pontos" and the perspective shift on the speaker (Egyptian account) and how they would perceive the geography in question. Thank you for doing the research and comparing the accounts, then funneling the data down to a video series that makes it summarized for the rest of us. My pipe dream is that they finally find a way to translate the Minoan dialect to the extent that they can read the written texts, wherein they refer to themselves or reference the word Atlantis, Atlanteans, etc. since we still don't know what the Minoans called themselves.

Interesting. Have you looked into the theories about the Richat Structure being Atlantis?

I have read in the analysis of the greek of Plato atlantic derives from Atlas , which as I recall would be towards Asia Minor - I definitely agree that it was not Atlantic ocean but questions santorini - which I like for other reasons - but I can entertain the asia minor area. Greek History makes a big demarcation for before Cretan domination and after - if you are looking for a definite argument here - it doesn't exist.

Do some research for yourself instead of parroting erroneous old text books just so you can pass a pointless exam...then grow up

Much to share by the grace of god 🕊️ heddwch

Enjoyable story, well told, but those cherries are *very* carefully picked. My favourite bit is calling superficial similarities between Columbus' description of *the Bahamas* and Brendan's "description" of (presumably) *Newfoundland* "evidence". Also the claim that a stopover by a peripatetic monk is the cause of introduction of domestic sheep to the Faroes.

Nice reasoning.

I would suggest that Cerniw or Cernyw was what the Gower Peninsula was once known as, we know that after the Romans left Britain, what is now Wales started sectioning off into 3 regions essentially the “Kingdoms” of “North Wales”, “South Wales” and “Mid-South Wales” What came to be known as “Mid-South Wales” in latter traditional materials was more often known as Cernyw in the early days. A fairly small region which according to tradition was founded out of the western chunk of the once Silurian territory in the early 5th century by Eugenius (the son of Magnus Maximus according to later claims) This was west of Gwent and Glywysing and was what we know today as the Gower Peninsula. Pasgen ap Urien was King of Gwyr around early 6th Century. Gwyr is the Welsh for the Gower so suggesting that the Gower was a Kingdom at one point and maybe what was once Cernyw Why is this the most likely location, well the Gower Peninsula is directly west of Gwent and Glywysing, Gwyr was once a Kingdom, so a small Kingdom in the Mid-South of what is now Wales, as the early traditions claim Cernyw was and it is on the south coast so if the Mercians (The Boars) where heading towards Cernyw (the Gower Peninsula) they would have to pass through Gwent and Glywysing and King Arthur territory and pushing them down would be pushing them into the Severn Sea (Bristol Channel) and for the most convincing part, it’s the name itself, Cernyw. Cernyw means horn land, land shaped like a horn The root is Carn, which with the addition of yw causes a vowel infection, so the A of Carn becomes an E. Carn means a prominence; a horn; a heap; a hilt of a weapon; the hoof of an animal. Yw means is; be; it is So in context of naming a place Cernyw, you are saying it is a horn, so in the context of land, the land is horned shaped and the Gower Peninsula is horn shaped, hence Peninsula. This also applies to Cornwall however there is a slight difference with Cornwall is that is Corniu, this is significant because the Cornish did not change their alphabet like the Welsh did so the i didn’t change to the y like in Welsh and the u didn’t change to the w like in Welsh, so despite them being the exact same word, meaning the exact same thing, because the Welsh orthography changed (numerous times) over the millennia, this is why we know Cerniw/Cernyw refers to a place in Wales as opposed to Cerniu/Kerniu in Cornish. Cerniw is often also applied to Cornwall from a Welsh perspective and so often when people see the word Cerniw they automatically associate it with Cornwall not understanding the meaning and application of the term and that it could be used for any peninsula not just Cornwall, Cornwall just retained that name. In Welsh/Brythonic Gelliwig would have been a fairly common name for a place at one point as it was toponymic name but no longer the case as a “Gelliwig” would no longer be a thing as time went on and habitational practices changed. Gelli itself is still a very common term used in names of places in Wales though. Gelli is the mutated version of Celli, the soft mutation of C is G and this G is not the same as the standard G despite it looking the same letter, they are distinct letters and the mutated version of C has only been depicted as a G letter since the Middle Ages and this will crop up later with the second part of the name(Gwîg) Gelliwig is a compound of Celli + Gwîg Celli means an grove; a bower; an arbour Gwîg means a strait place; a corner nook or angle; a cove; a small retreat or opening in the woods in which Britons (Welsh) generally built their hamlets and hence traditionally used the term to denote a fortress/place of security/town which was hidden away in an opening amongst the trees, making it more inconspicuous. These were more common back in the day because woods and forests were more plentiful and the need to be more hidden away was greater. Over the years it came to be a general term for a settlement, a town/village/hamlet and also a street/alley owing to its use as a term for a strait. It also, in one of those strange instances of associations with the actual meaning, also came to be a term for a wood/forest/grove because of the fact the term was used to describe a settlement in a clearing within a wood/forest, the term often got wrongly applied to the wood/forest as opposed to the entire thing, which lead to having words like coedwig for a forest/wood where coed means wood/timber/trees, so literal translation being a wood of wood or a forest of trees etc I don’t know if you can get a wood/forest of something other than wood/trees but it’s kind of like the River Avon or Afon Afon, the River River Gwîg is where we get the -wick/-wich in English -wick being an alternate form of -wich which in Middle English was -wic and in Old English was -wīc and was adopted into Old English from the Welsh (g)wîg, (g)wîg ending in the Welsh letter G that was once a C, it became a C in the Middle Ages which is why you see variations of names like Meuric and Tewdric for Meurig and Tewdrig for example so when wīc was adopted into Old English it would have still been spelt wîc in Welsh or in the transitional period at least. I should add that I am not claiming that the Welsh word wasn’t adopted from say Latin, I just know that the “establishment” narrative is probably that it came from some Germanic word which is spelt and pronounced differently, be that a deliberate narrative or just the typical refusal to use Welsh as a reference language when deciding on the etymology of words, like the native language of Britain would have absolutely no influence of the English language, the Anglo-Saxons and Normans couldn’t possibly adopt words of the natives of the land. We know for example the Warwick was at one point surrounded by dense woodlands so it would have been a settlement within an opening amongst the woods/forest which is what the word gwîg meant originally and the War part means a weir. I can’t find any name for “Warwick” prior to it becoming Warwick in the 10 century, however we do know that a settlement did exist prior to it being named Warwick so I am guessing they adopted the existing name into the new name which is why it ends in wick and not burh which technically it would have been, if being a typically named Anglo-Saxon fortified settlement, which is what Warwick was built by Æthelflæd to be. The river that flows through Warwick being the River Avon so they retained the Welsh name of the river too, so for an ancient Brythonic settlement, it would have been an ideal site for a Gwîg, an opening in a forest with a river flowing through it and with the tradition of naming places toponymically, it would almost certainly contained the word Gwîg in it’s name. So with all that in mind, Gelliwig would be somewhere between Mercia and the Gower Peninsula and in what is now the Gwent/South Glamorgan/Mid Glamorgan area of Wales in order for them to be forced south and into the Severn Sea to be possible. So if as you say, Llanwytherin was once called Gelliwig, then this would indeed fit those parameters geographically and would have a good claim to be the location of the Gelliwig in the story.

Thanks for this. In The Keys to Avalon, Blake and Lloyd give a whole revised geography of the Arthurian material showing that it is confined to Wales and has been wrongly mapped onto Britain as a whole. This includes identifying Kernyw with the area around the Llyn peninsula and things like Ceint being not Kent but Gwent and Llundain being not London but Ludlow.

Good to see others doing good research and adding in common sense. Why after skirmishes/battls would you then ride presumably heavily fatigued 150 miles to recuperate only then to return to protect your kingdom?

There’s an area on the outskirts of Newport still known as Coedkernew. Look it up on Google Maps.

You're not the first to figure this out, Wilson & Blackett were. But thanks for the reminder.