Actually the Khumry actually built Britain. This is the royal line from which kings Arthur I and Arthur II derive. The Angles and Saxons came much later and were contracted by the ancient Brits (Khumry) as coast guards. Hengis the One-Eyed and Horsa were Saxons that betrayed the British kings killing several of them. He was hunted down and killed as a result. In 562 AD a comet strikes decimated the British Isles. The recordings of this event is well documented. The resulting fires could be seen across the English channel in France. So, devastating were the fires, it was written that nothing would grow for over 7 years. Evidence of the the comet strikes and the immense heat is found in Scotland where glassified rock and the remains of a castle are found. King Arthur II sent his brother Prince Madoc Morfran, son of King Meurig to find new lands to resettle his people. Admiral Madoc Morfran sailed to America as it is well recorded. In fact, three voyages occurred in 562, 573, and 574 AD.

My hypothesis ascribes the stories of fire-breathing dragons in Britain having its origins from this horrific calamity occurring in the land. Think how the people of this age could explain away something as devastating as fire from the sky scorching the earth and destroying their crops for years to come. Why is it that fire breathing dragon stories include this type of retribution? My family crescent has three fire balls on it, which I'm researching it to be a vigilant remembrance of this single catastrophic event.

There's much more to this, but the comet strikes greatly weakened the Khumry. As a result, the angles and Saxons from northern Germany established an increasing presence in the British Isles.

The censorship, perfidy, fraud, and persecution of Welsh history starts with the name "Welsh" itself, which derives from 'wallische' in old High German meaning "strangers." It is the name the Saxons gave to the Khumry in their own land. To this day, the Khumric people refer to themselves as the Khumry. The story of the Saxon conquest was not a conquest of superiority, but one as a result of catastrophic destruction to the British surrounding land in AD 562 caused by comet debris.

The Khumry and the Irish are not "Celts." The Khumry are "Khumri." The Irish are "Gaels." In fact, it is now admitted by some leading scholars that there was never any "Celts" in Britannia. This name was improperly promulgated mainly from British 19th Century hack academics of Edwin Guest and Bishop Stubbs. The name was anciently applied to the inhabitants of Gaul. Although, the country was defined between the Ocean and the Palus Maeotis, which ascribed Spain and Germany as well. Gaul was called Gallia Celtica, which was situated between the rivers Sequanna and Garumna, modernly called La Seine and La Garrone. The Celtae seemed to have received their name from Celtus a son of Hercules or of Polyphemus. Notwithstanding, it is yet another name given to them by the writers of history.   The first Christian Church was established in England (Lloegres) in 35 - 37 AD. The Druids who accepted Jesus are recorded as stating they always believed in one God and knew of His coming. The Roman Catholic Church does not want you to know this, but will admit it when pressured. The founding of Christianity in Rome in AD 51 started with the British Family of Caradoc I. This is admitted by the Roman Church.   The first assumption is that the Romans conquered all of Britain and dominated it for 400 to 450 years. This is false. Tacitus recorded that there were 80 battles with the Brits to which the British won 60 of them. The British histories agrees with this. Julius Ceasar was humiliated in defeat in 55 and 54 BC. One of these battles, they were lucky enough to be escorted back to their ships and told not to return. The last Roman governor of South-East Britain was Sallustus. He was executed by Domitian in AD 80. This is when Bonassus brought the Romans out of England. Roman records prove even before their ejection in AD 80, their new policy was to persuade the British kings and princes to trade with Rome for the things needed by Rome. No accords were reached until Hadrian's visit to Britain in AD 124. It was not by any means to conquer, but to forge a trading agreement, to which he achieved.

In circa AD 44, Claudius, the Roman Emperor adopted the British King, Caradoc I daughter, Eurgain (Gladys). Eurgain was given the name Claudia by Emperor Claudius. Eurgain/Gladys/Claudius became the wife of Roman senator, Rufus Pudens, who was half-brother of St. Paul (refer to Romans 16:13).

British script (writing) was described by Caesar, Strabo, Ammianus Marcellinus. Strabo also recorded that a Briton of the Age spoke Greek with fluency as if he had been bred up at the Lyceum; the great university of Athens. Strabo, circa 50 BC reported on his fulsome admiration for British learning and culture. Caesar described British cities and universities where students from all over Western Europe, especially from Gaul, flocked to study.

The Roman historian, Ammianus Marcellinus described the British alphabet and was clear that the Greeks had obtained their similar alphabet from the British. This makes sense if the Brutus migration to Britain in 504 BC is considered. Even Arab historians as late as AD 1100 referred to Britain as Brutusland.

There were actually two King Arthurs. The first Arthur killed a powerful Irish prince, Rhitta Gawr, in c. 367 AD. Gruffydd ap Arthur (Geoffry of Monmouth) and the "Brut History of Tyssilio" relate how Arthur invaded Gaul, besieged Paris, and defeated the Roman Emperor and his barbarian general Soissons = Sassy. Then they tell how Arthur killed the Roman Emperor. These are the exploits of Arthur I, eldest son of Magnus Maximus, grandson of Flavius Julius Crispus Caesar, great grandson of the British Constantine the Great, who as Magnus' chief general did invade Gaul in 383 AD and capture Paris, the stronghold of the Lady of St. Genevieve. This Arthur then defeated the massed armies of the Roman Emperor Gratian at Soissons, and chased him South to Lugdunum = Lyons where he killed him. The campaigns of Arthur I through Switzerland and down through Italy, over to Greece, and up into the Balkans are recorded and well known. He fought two major battles against Theodosius of Constantinople in Illyria = Yugoslavia, where he was greatly outnumbered and finally defeated. Arthur I was known to Latins as Andragathius made his way back to Britain in 388 AD. This Arthur who just as the Histories tell was succeeded by his cousin Constantine Coronog = the Crowned, who invaded Gaul in 406 AD and set up another British Emperor. Constantine Coronog was powerful enough to seize Gaul and Spain and defeat the Germanic confederation of the Vandals, Suyeves, and Alans.   Arthur II was a sixth century descended of Arthur I, born in c. 503 AD and died in 579. He fought the Jutes, Angles, Saxons, and others. It was during his reign that Britain was devastated by a comet. Just how three boat-loads of Saxons, hired as coastguards by the usurper Gwrtheyrn (Vortigern) in the civil war of 426 AD, could defeat the military aggressive British, who indeed conquered Western Europe through Magnus Maximus and Arthur I and then repeated the act under a cousin, Constantine Coronog, is not explained. 562 AD is the same year that Arthur II's brother, prince Madoc Morfran, son of King Meurig, sailed to America as it is well recorded. In fact, three voyages occurred in 562, 573, and 574 AD.

Yet, there is far more to the story, I have already spent more time than I should have regarding this fascinating subject. One last note, is that while the printing press was practiced in England from 1474 AD when William Caxton setup his printing press in London, it was illegal in Wales. The Welsh were forbidden to speak their language in public sectors and are prevented from doing so even to this day. In 1996, Mr. P. Flynn, the Member of Parliament for Newport in Gwent, S.E. Wales, stood up and made a few comments and began reading from a book. The Speaker of the House of Commons - a former theater chorus girl - rose to the bait and shouting and bawling in her best fishwife manner she proclaimed that as Mr. Flynn well knew -"not one single word of that Language is to be spoken in this House."  Amid laughter Mr. Paul Flynn patiently explained what almost everyone else knew, that the book he was reading from was Chaucer, written in 14th Century Old English. The persecution and suppression of Khumry history, despite it being well recorded and documented continues to this day.

Is it a coincidence that the senior British King dwelt in Glamorgan along the banks of the Severn? Is it an accident that Cardiff, where the fortress was found in 74 AD is the property of Caer-Dydd, and the archaic meaning of "Dydd" is "agreement"? Might it be here that the agreement was struck between the British King and Hadrian, at the Castle of the Agreement? Coincidences? No. There are many more proofs beside this that validates the Roman presence in Britain is very different than what is painted by the highly paid and kosher-approved historians.

Actually its the Khumry did. This is the correct line from which kings Arthur I and Arthur II derive. The Angles and Saxons came much later and were contracted by the ancient Brits (Khumry) as coast guards. Hengis the One-Eyed and Horsa were Saxons that betrayed the British kings killing several of them. He was hunted down and killed as a result. In 562 AD a comet strikes decimated the British Isles. The recordings of this event is well documented. The resulting fires could be seen across the English channel in France. So, devastating were the fires, it was written that nothing would grow for over 7 years. Evidence of the the comet strikes and the immense heat is found in Scotland where glassified rock and the remains of a castle are found. King Arthur II sent his brother Prince Madoc Morfran, son of King Meurig to find new lands to resettle his people. Admiral Madoc Morfran sailed to America as it is well recorded. In fact, three voyages occurred in 562, 573, and 574 AD.

My hypothesis ascribes the stories of fire-breathing dragons in Britain having its origins from this horrific calamity occurring in the land. Think how the people of this age could explain away something as devastating as fire from the sky scorching the earth and destroying their crops for years to come. Why is it that fire breathing dragon stories include this type of retribution? My family crescent has three fire balls on it, which I'm researching it to be a vigilant remembrance of this single catastrophic event.

There's much more to this, but the comet strikes greatly weakened the Khumry. As a result, the angles and Saxons from northern Germany established an increasing presence in the British Isles.

The censorship, perfidy, fraud, and persecution of Welsh history starts with the name "Welsh" itself, which derives from 'wallische' in old High German meaning "strangers." It is the name the Saxons gave to the Khumry in their own land. To this day, the Khumric people refer to themselves as the Khumry. The story of the Saxon conquest was not a conquest of superiority, but one as a result of catastrophic destruction to the British surrounding land in AD 562 caused by comet debris.

The Khumry and the Irish are not "Celts." The Khumry are "Khumri." The Irish are "Gaels." In fact, it is now admitted by some leading scholars that there was never any "Celts" in Britannia. This name was improperly promulgated mainly from British 19th Century hack academics of Edwin Guest and Bishop Stubbs. The name was anciently applied to the inhabitants of Gaul. Although, the country was defined between the Ocean and the Palus Maeotis, which ascribed Spain and Germany as well. Gaul was called Gallia Celtica, which was situated between the rivers Sequanna and Garumna, modernly called La Seine and La Garrone. The Celtae seemed to have received their name from Celtus a son of Hercules or of Polyphemus. Notwithstanding, it is yet another name given to them by the writers of history.   The first Christian Church was established in England (Lloegres) in 35 - 37 AD. The Druids who accepted Jesus are recorded as stating they always believed in one God and knew of His coming. The Roman Catholic Church does not want you to know this, but will admit it when pressured.   The first assumption is that the Romans conquered all of Britain and dominated it for 400 to 450 years. This is false. The Brits are recorded as defeating the Romans some 60 times. Julius Ceasar was humiliated in defeat in 55 and 54 BC. One of these battles, they were lucky enough to be escorted back to their ships and told not to return.

There were actually two King Arthurs. The first Arthur killed a powerful Irish prince, Rhitta Gawr, in c. 367 AD. Gruffydd ap Arthur (Geoffry of Monmouth) and the "Brut History of Tyssilio" relate how Arthur invaded Gaul, besieged Paris, and defeated the Roman Emperor and his barbarian general Soissons = Sassy. Then they tell how Arthur killed the Roman Emperor. These are the exploits of Arthur I, eldest son of Magnus Maximus, the grandson of British Constantine the Great, who as Magnus' chief general did invade Gaul in 383 AD and capture Paris, the stronghold of the Lady of St. Genevieve. This Arthur then defeated the massed armies of the Roman Emperor Gratian at Soissons, and chased him South to Lugdunum = Lyons where he killed him. The campaigns of Arthur I through Switzerland and down through Italy, over to Greece, and up into the Balkans are recorded and well known. He fought two major battles against Theodosius of Constantinople in Illyria = Yugoslavia, where he was greatly outnumbered and finally defeated. Arthur I was known to Latins as Andragathius made his way back to Britain in 388 AD. This Arthur who just as the Histories tell was succeeded by his cousin Constantine Coronog = the Crowned, who invaded Gaul in 406 AD and set up another British Emperor. Constantine Coronog was powerful enough to seize Gaul and Spain and defeat the Germanic confederation of the Vandals, Suyeves, and Alans.   Arthur II was a sixth century descended of Arthur I, born in c. 503 AD and died in 579. He fought the Jutes, Angles, Saxons, and others. It was during his reign that Britain was devastated by a comet. Just how three boat-loads of Saxons, hired as coastguards by the usurper Gwrtheyrn (Vortigern) in the civil war of 426 AD, could defeat the military aggressive British, who indeed conquered Western Europe through Magnus Maximus and Arthur I and then repeated the act under a cousin, Constantine Coronog, is not explained. 562 AD is the same year that Arthur II's brother, prince Madoc Morfran, son of King Meurig, sailed to America as it is well recorded. In fact, three voyages occurred in 562, 573, and 574 AD.

Yet, there is far more to the story, I have already spent more time than I should have regarding this fascinating subject. One last note, is that while the printing press was practiced in England from 1474 AD when William Caxton setup his printing press in London, it was illegal in Wales. The Welsh were forbidden to speak their language in public sectors and are prevented from doing so even to this day. In 1996, Mr. P. Flynn, the Member of Parliament for Newport in Gwent, S.E. Wales, stood up and made a few comments and began reading from a book. The Speaker of the House of Commons - a former theater chorus girl - rose to the bait and shouting and bawling in her best fishwife manner she proclaimed that as Mr. Flynn well knew -"not one single word of that Language is to be spoken in this House."  Amid laughter Mr. Paul Flynn patiently explained what almost everyone else knew, that the book he was reading from was Chaucer, written in 14th Century Old English. The persecution and suppression of Khumry history, despite it being well recorded and documented continues to this day.