The Cymry or the true history of Britain.

its funny eh,

The Toutant-Beauregard connection

Roots of this family: From official version, it descends from a named Tider, a Walsh rebelled against the King of England, who moved to France, to La Rochelle, where he became Toutant, about year 1200
...This family is mostly known for its descendant, Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard, the famous Southern general who ordered to fire the first canon shot of the US Civil War.

www.francogene.com...
now my ancestor general p.g. toutant Beauregard's private battle flag was the origin of old glory the south's famous battle flag.
my long time AV before my present working celtic cross AV
guess what
the old glory is made of
stars a cross and pyramids

if you check out my siggy thread you will find that is the symbology of the real working celtic cross and it goes all the way back to atlantis and the ruling line of aryan goths that recivilized the world after the glaciers melted

there is a lot of pertinant info on that thread

now Gen'l Beauregard was a combat engineer and a knights templar who were keepers of the true cross and the grail.
the cross was a navigational and engineering instrument of incredible precision

Knights Templar[edit]
The Knights Templar had a strong presence in La Rochelle since before the time of Eleanor of Aquitaine, who exempted them from duties and gave them mills in her 1139 Charter.[3] La Rochelle was for the Templars their largest base on the Atlantic Ocean,[4] and where they stationed their main fleet.[5] From La Rochelle, they were able to act as intermediaries in trade between England and the Mediterranean.[4] A popular thread of conspiracy theory originating with Holy Blood, Holy Grail has it that the Templars used a fleet of 18 ships which had brought Jacques de Molay from Cyprus to La Rochelle to escape arrest in France. The fleet allegedly left laden with knights and treasures just before the issue of the warrant for the arrest of the Order in October 1307.[6][7]

en.wikipedia.org...

now also of interest Tider lost to Henry the second who also lost la rochelle around the same time. 1200 ad

and if one subscribes to the troy in britain theory
www.troy-in-england.co.uk...
tider is possibly decended from the same root word as titan
which makes some sort of sense when considered with the info on my siggy thread

tide (n.) Look up tide at Dictionary.com
Old English tid "point or portion of time, due time, period, season; feast-day, canonical hour," from Proto-Germanic *tidiz "division of time" (cognates: Old Saxon tid, Dutch tijd, Old High German zit, German Zeit "time"), from PIE *di-ti- "division, division of time," suffixed form of root *da- "to divide, cut up" (cognates: Sanskrit dati "cuts, divides;" Greek demos "people, land," perhaps literally "division of society," daiesthai "to divide;" Old Irish dam "troop, company").

Meaning "rise and fall of the sea" (mid-14c.) probably is via notion of "fixed time," specifically "time of high water;" either a native evolution or from Middle Low German getide (compare Middle Dutch tijd, Dutch tij, German Gezeiten "flood tide, tide of the sea"). Old English seems to have had no specific word for this, using flod and ebba to refer to the rise and fall. Old English heahtid "high tide" meant "festival, high day."
tide (v.) Look up tide at Dictionary.com
"to carry (as the tide does)," 1620s, from tide (n.). Usually with over. Earlier it meant "to happen" (Old English; see tidings). Related: Tided; tiding.

www.etymonline.com...

which is exactly what the working celtic cross was used to do
thats why they say to this day to cross the ocean
it could calculate time distance angles and levels ...especially in conjunction with henges
again go look

no brag just facts




lol
just thought id look up the other side of the family name - root word cam

Cambrian (adj.) Look up Cambrian at Dictionary.com
1650s, "from or of Wales or the Welsh," from Cambria, variant of Cumbria, Latinized derivation of Cymry, the name of the Welsh for themselves, from Old Celtic Combroges "compatriots." Geological sense (of rocks first studied in Wales and Cumberland) is from 1836.

www.etymonline.com...
the side that the namesake came to canada in the the british navy in 1812 and then went native

a reply to: Danbones

Some interesting ideas there. I will have a read up about the things you have written about.

originally posted by: beansidhe
a reply to: urbanghost

Yep, same name, same spelling. Definitely the same guy, though?

That I couldn't say. To be honest, when I first read it I was a bit dubious that it was true, but there is a lot of nationalistic feeling among some welsh.
On the other hand I have heard about the "bullying" of the farmer before.
I am still looking for a photo of the BNP candidate to confirm if it's him or not

a reply to: LABTECH767
I don't think anyone believes that the druids sacrificed anyone in wicker men or any other way anymore. The archaeological record shows no evidence of it. It is now thought to be Roman propaganda to discredit the Celts, only two romans ever mentioned the wicker man, Julius Caesar and Poseidonius. Ceasar was just repeating what Poseidonius wrote.
As for what druids practice now, there are no written accounts of the ancient druid practices that are held as true. They never wrote anything down themselves as they practiced an oral tradition. Only Pliny the Elder ever wrote about their rituals and they are doubtful. If the Druids were such a secretive people how did Pliny get to see their rituals?
So unless you can prove direct lineage from the ancient druids I doubt any of the rituals you described are anything like what the ancient druids practiced. There is nothing wrong with neo-druidism, everybody is entitled to their religious beliefs, but claiming that it the same as the ancient druids is not correct.
It started in the 18th century as a monotheistic philosophical tradition, which it was still described as at the end of 19th century. Only in the 20th century with the rise of the pagan movement did the neo-druids start worshipping multiple gods. Even the druids prayer was written by Iolo Morganwg a literary forger. The Coelbren y Beirdd was also invented by him and has nothing to do with the druids.

a reply to: urbanghost
hey Urb
Not too shabby for a first thread, i think you become will a much respected contributor here at ATS
and as regards the cross i think you will find that we are pretty close to being on the same page

Your thread has certainly opened up a new angle for my investigation I had not thought of, and so thank you for that contribution.


Ever hear the one about the Welshman in the bushes who challenged the king of England and his troops as they rode through?
First the king sent a fierce knight to answer the challenge.
Trashed.
hmmm... thought the king: " I cannot let that go by!"
So the king sent in two knights to answer the taunting voice.
Smashed.
Geeez, he could still see the second horses tail...
Getting somewhat pissed the king then sent five knights into the weeds.
Five against one, but so what? By now it was results, not honor, the king was after.
He would just bribe the scribe, and edit the story later as victors were want to do.
but no...
that little fantasy lasted about a minute and half...
Bashed.
Some beat up peaces of armor came rolling back out towards the king...
His war horse kicked a helm out of the road, and snorted...and turned to look back at the king...strangely.
He snapped a little then, and waved in a whole troop to answer the laughing Welsh challenge...
"A castle! My daughter's hand! Riches beyond compare to the knight that brings me that pagan's bastard head!"
Roared the King!

Well the clamor of battle went on for a couple of minutes, and just as the king was thinking he was about to be rewarded with the head of a rogue, a single beat down knight came crawling back out of the bushes
looking like he had fallen down a very long ...looong...loooong....flight of stone stairs...
Into a pile of hot fresh dog poop.

As he crawled up to the now totally furiously fuming would be invader, the knight lifted his battle cracked head up to the king and gurgled:
"my liege... don't go in there!
its a trap!

there's TWO OF THEM!!!

Yep,
them Welsh were tough guys...

a reply to: Danbones
Thank you for your comment about the thread. I have been looking into my theory for many years and I thought that this forum would be a good place to air my views. I'm not expecting everyone to believe what I write, some of it is just supposition on my part but there are small shreds of evidence for the bits that are not widely accepted.
The croes Geltaidd of Wales has been around in Britain for a long time, much longer than in Ireland. It is thought it didn't arrive in Ireland until St Patrick (who it is thought was Welsh by the way) introduced it in the 5th century. None have been found there from any earlier than this.

Interesting read, thanks for posting!

It's funny to me to sense a bit of Welsh Vs English STILL to this day. It's not something I know much about..

My Fathers family were Welsh (North Wales) and my Mothers English.

So really, I can't be taking sides

originally posted by: DreamerOracle
... the ability to run and hide in the mountains doesn't really mean undefeated.

The welsh tribes lived in the mountains, they only used the low lands to grow food. So really they never run and hid. That is just propaganda from the invading armies.
This is a map of my area of coastline, it is the land of the Silures.
All the flags are sites that I have researched so far and attributed to the Welsh dating from the Mesolithic to the Medieval times. They are hill forts, settlements, burial sites and castles. All without fail are on mountains, hills, cliffs and islands.

This is an interesting topic, but probably too limited in scope. I agree with the op that Welsh history is purposely hidden, but so is most of mankind's history, not just Welsh. For what reason, I don't know.

The stone crosses depicted in this thread don't look Christian to me.

originally posted by: mrnotobc

This is an interesting topic, but probably too limited in scope. I agree with the op that Welsh history is purposely hidden, but so is most of mankind's history, not just Welsh. For what reason, I don't know.

The stone crosses depicted in this thread don't look Christian to me, and I agree, the writing looks like it was added later.

originally posted by: angelchemuel
Just to pick up on another poster who had the temerity to say the welsh word for a computer was "made up".....Cyfrifiadur....basically broken down to counting, and calculating, just like its english equivalent computer.

Funnily enough this word has been in the Welsh language since the 16th century. Computer was first recorded in the 17th century, so came later. Looks like it was the English who needed to make up a word for their "dead" language.

a reply to: urbanghost

The kings and queens of England have 'nothing to do with Wales'? They have rule you since since 1283!

Unconquered my foot. I believe the mainstream hypothesis regarding the genetic differences between the Welsh and others is that their conquerers found them all so terribly unattractive.

a reply to: Astyanax

If that is true why are they called the kings and queens of ENGLAND not Britain? How was Owain Glyndwr ruler of Wales in the 14th and early 15th century if they have ruled us since the 13th century? I think you need to read up on your history a bit.
There is no mainstream hypothesis that says the genetic differences are because the welsh were found unattractive. That is just made up and slightly offensive.
The real mainstream hypothesis is that offas dyke acted as a barrier when the Anglo-Saxons invaded Britain. They then proceeded to wipe out the rest of the indigenous population east of the dyke, this is why the English are nearly genetically identical with people from Friesland, which is now part of Northern Netherlands.

originally posted by: urbanghost
The real mainstream hypothesis is that offas dyke acted as a barrier when the Anglo-Saxons invaded Britain. They then proceeded to wipe out the rest of the indigenous population east of the dyke, this is why the English are nearly genetically identical with people from Friesland, which is now part of Northern Netherlands.

Utter bollocks..

Whilst certain regions in the UK have a certain tendency to have a higher than average incidence of certain gene's, the whole population is the result of millennia of mixing.

You realise, of course, that the "Welsh" are what used to be called the Romano-British and did occupy pretty much the whole of Roman land in what is now the UK. Now, when the Anglo-Saxons came over, they didn't "wipe out" anyone.

The numbers of Anglo-Saxons that came over after the Legions left was no where near enough to wipe anyone out. Originally, they came over as raiders and mercenaries, then, much like the Vikings that came after them, they settled and took over, replacing the upper-echelons of the "elite", but the common man carried on ploughing his field and learnt to speak like his new masters, just like his ancestors did.

Genetic studies support this. For example, in Yorkshire, they have found a haplogroup (A!) that is only found in African populations, but in people with no African heritage - the only explanation is that African members of the Legions came over, settled and bred with locals, passing this gene down through the ages to modern descendent.

You are selectively and erroneously applying pieces of history and genetic science to fit your viewpoint, while actually ignoring a huge chunk of history. Ironic you should say "Welsh" history is hidden, because it isn't. You've just decided to ignore large parts of it to support your little nationalist rant.

a reply to: urbanghost

Owain Glyndwr was an "anglo-welsh" aristocrat who appointed himself "Prince of Powys" as it was a title held by an ancestor of his. Hardly a true Welshman (as you would have it, with your ludicrous claims of genetic purity) or even a true Prince, really.

originally posted by: urbanghost

originally posted by: beansidhe
a reply to: urbanghost

Yep, same name, same spelling. Definitely the same guy, though?

That I couldn't say. To be honest, when I first read it I was a bit dubious that it was true, but there is a lot of nationalistic feeling among some welsh.
On the other hand I have heard about the "bullying" of the farmer before.
I am still looking for a photo of the BNP candidate to confirm if it's him or not

I couldn't find anything at all, and I'm with you, a bit dubious that it's him. Still, it might be and it would be good to clear the matter up.
On a side note and purely out of curiosity, why do you think that Iolo Morganwg was a forger? I've read that he was and read that he wasn't, and to be honest I'm confused.

a reply to: stumason
Owain Glyndwr was the last native Welshman to hold the title Prince of Wales. He wasn't Anglo anything.
His father was a direct descendent of the princes of Powys and his mother the line of Deheubarth. You can't get any more welsh than that.
It's amazing the amount of people that say this person wasn't really welsh and that person wasn't really welsh, when in reality the proof against what you say is everywhere to be read. Why do you do this? Is there some ulterior motive to it? Just look it up online and you will see.
There is nothing nationalistic about what I am writing, unless you call the truth that. The only people showing nationalistic feelings are people like you who are getting very upset and confrontational about what I have written.
I am not selectively picking history, it is all checkable. Try doing this.

a reply to: beansidhe
There is evidence that Iolo Morganwg added stuff to manuscripts. There are more than one copy of some of the Welsh manuscripts and the ones "discovered" by Iolo have added sections not in the older manuscripts. Most of the stuff he wrote has no corresponding proof any where else.
When I get back from work I will dig out some examples for you to see.

a reply to: urbanghost

Aah, I see. That would be much appreciated, thank you

originally posted by: urbanghost
a reply to: stumason
Owain Glyndwr was the last native Welshman to hold the title Prince of Wales. He wasn't Anglo anything.

Hate to burst your bubble, but he most certainly was, as was all the nobility up and down the Marches. In fact, it was on his mothers side he had Thomas ap Llywelyn as his Grandfather, otherwise known as Thomas Tudor.

originally posted by: urbanghost
His father was a direct descendent of the princes of Powys and his mother the line of Deheubarth. You can't get any more welsh than that.

And once again, you're being selective about which evidence you look at. He had a mother too - his mother, with her father being Thomas ap Llewelyn, was descended from Duke Henri of Bar III and Eleanor Plantagenet, those being his Grandparents.

Source - Thomas ap Lewelyn, Owain Glyndwr's grandfather

In fact, he was so Welsh, he was educated in England and served in the English Army.

yes, definitely 100% Welsh

originally posted by: urbanghost
It's amazing the amount of people that say this person wasn't really welsh and that person wasn't really welsh, when in reality the proof against what you say is everywhere to be read. Why do you do this? Is there some ulterior motive to it?

I am only doing it in the interests of the truth and not to forward some fanciful, half-baked nationalist fantasy. It is proof that, rather than as you claim the Welsh are some sort of genetically pure race, that all the people of this island are interbred and integrated

originally posted by: urbanghost
Just look it up online and you will see.

have done, proved you wrong...

originally posted by: urbanghost
There is nothing nationalistic about what I am writing, unless you call the truth that. The only people showing nationalistic feelings are people like you who are getting very upset and confrontational about what I have written.
I am not selectively picking history, it is all checkable. Try doing this.

Haha, righto. Despite being a very well read student of the history of these islands, I did double check and it still shows you as talking out of your arsehole.

No, what you hoped to do with this thread was prove some fantasy about the Welsh. You base this on some rather cherry-picked genetic evidence, when all it does is show one haplogroup out of many and are also being selective about which "ancestor" to look at to prove who is "Welsh".

Like I said, the "Welsh" were the Romano-British driven West by the Anglo-Saxon takeover. The word Welsh is an Anglo-Saxon word meaning "foreigner". All this is evidenced in the Anglo-Saxon chronicles which details the wars between the invaders and the Welsh. You aren't some mythical race of people, you aren't even the original inhabitants, having been under the Roman yoke for so long you can find evidence of foreign influence in Welsh DNA as much as in English or even Scots DNA.

Yes, you may find the incidence for certain genes increases in certain area's, but overall you're not any different from the rest of us. All that ever changes is the people in charge - many people living in England nowadays, especially in the Midlands or Cumbria or Cornwall will share many of the same markers, because we are the same people.

Now, before you launch on another tirade of how I am being "confrontational" or trying to suppress the truth, I am of Cornish stock myself, so the very same people who were pushed West by the encroaching Anglo-Saxon takeover, but being only interested in the truth and not some flight of fancy, nationalist bollocks, I will challenge you on this.