Hi everyone! Thanks for watching as always! Don't forget about the Tshirt Comp! You can win a signed copy of my book plus i'll send you the Tshirt you designed! ua-cam.com/video/QkozCpyvQrs/v-deo.html Let's have some more entries! Woooohoooo!
Yes It's a beautiful and clearly a mid evil remanent of a Roman conquered area. Myself and my followers, as well as many other channels I produce have been very interested in your work, yet this is the third or maybe fourth time you've put forth what is clearly Norman/Saxon...taken over by The Romans. Clearly the Saxons used the Roman workings. What confuses me and many of my followers is what and or why do you continue on with such, when it's very clear and nothing more then a natural Celtic/Saxon remodeling/beautiful strong structured building. The layers and or arches are clear and there p, as well as taken over by the latter. As a big fan of yours that gives to you many likes and views, from the feed back I'm getting, it'd be great and very successful for you to start treating and producing more intellectually based hypothesis of these ideologies. Thank you for all your work from myself and my many channels whom bring you many more views due to our sharing and giving you your own playlists. It's clear to use your knowledge to prove that archeology is NOT what we've been told and there's much much more hidden in plain site. You have the potential and now the resources to start announcing the actualities amongst all you've explored and made clear, yet you leave things for others to try and configure. If you'd like your book to be a best seller use the truth and knowledge you base your findings on and publishing will be like like a drink of water. Again. Ty for all your hard work and time spent. It's a pleasure spreading your work, as long as it comes with a hypothesis worth further inquiries and not just "up in the air," figure it out for yourselves guys. If you're willing, make your thesis and then you'll have the monetary and furthermore backing you'll need. These chances come once in a lifetime. Your work in Michigan and the lakes/flooded areas are on point and true to a fact. Cheers back to you Charles, but give us something to actually toast to as opposed to leaving all your work up to hearsay. Thanks again...GW
Heya Dr Charles , interesting video so far , ( almost half way through) although I need to watch again from beginning because I must've missed what the name of the church is.
Some notes: 1. This is a Romanesque building: that is, one inspired by and reflecting the architecture and décor of buildings of the Roman period. We should expect it to show some 'Roman' features, especially if it reuses Roman stone. 2. The Anglo-Saxon period lasted several centuries and we should expect differences between buildings of that period constructed (and altered) at different times, in different areas, under varying patronage, with varying resources and varying levels of craftsmanship. 3. I wasn't aware of a claim that this is the UK's oldest Saxon church, but since the building was rediscovered there has been a strong tradition of suggesting it was built by, i.e. under the auspices of, St Aldhelm in the late seventh century. This rested on a statement made by the historian William of Malmesbury - writing in the tweflth century - that Aldhelm built a church at Bradford which was still standing in his (William's) day. The identification of this building as that built by Aldhelm rests on two rather shaky assumptions - a) that the church to which William refers as still standing was this building and b) that William was correct in stating that the church still standing in his day was the one built several centuries before by St Aldhelm. 4. I am likely out-of-date with the scholarly analysis of this building but, to massively summarise important expert articles (I don't have the references to hand), opinion has moved towards this being not a seventh-century building but a late Anglo-Saxon one, of the late tenth or early eleventh century, with some alterations to the windows carried out perhaps not very long after construction. 5. My brain cannot help making connections. My view, which I think would count as 'perfectly plausible but not provable', is as follows. I) It is perfectly possible that Aldhelm founded an early minster at Bradford. Any remains of that would likely be under, and/or perhaps in part incorporated in, the present main parish church. II) In 1001 King Aethelred granted Bradford to the nuns of Shaftesbury. They had the body/relics of Aethelred's brother Edward, whose death had allowed Aethelred to come to the throne. III) Edward was canonised: his remains were said to perform miracles. IV) The architecture of this building seems to belong to almost exactly this time, and it is probable that the building was intended as a mausoleum for Edward's royal (and saintly) remains, explaining its ornate (for the period and location) style. Another popular theory is that it was simply built as a church for the nuns, who would have needed one if they did indeed move temporarily to Bradford.
Absolutely correct Jonathan. The Romanesque blind arcading, he describes as roman arches, is Norman in style. The blind arches are not Roman but just built in a Roman style, we call Romanesque. There is evidence to show that this "layer" of the building was added later. Norman arches are typically rounded in style and this extension to the building has been made on top of the noticeably different ground level construction with its Saxon style narrow windows. The building dates to a period that is at least 300 years after the Romans left Britain. It's thought that the earliest construction dates to around 709 AD with most of the construction, as you say being in the late 10th or early 11th Century.
You seem to be describing the Early English architectural style (pointed arches) as Norman (semi-circular). Also, as far as I am aware, there is no evidence of the Saxons having lead lined windows.
So let's recap the Saxons took an existing structure and made it a place of worship? So it's a very old Saxon church, probably not the oldest that,I believe, is St. Martin's at Canterbury which in part is built on and with bit's of, a Roman building. Another example is the Saxon church at Dover castle in which bits of the adjacent Roman lighthouse can be found. Most old Parish churches in England were extended or refurbished down through the ages and in one way or another reflect the architecture of each period. So this is one of the oldest Saxon churches in Englanf because the saxons took an existing structure and with a few alterations made it into a church...Hope this helps!
Curved arches are not just Roman but they are also a major characteristic of Norman architecture. The Anglo Normans did invade Ireland. The Romans never conquered Ireland although they may have traded with the Irish. The so called "Irish" or Celtic designs in the Church are Celtic. Celtic designs are common in this part of the West Country and its proximity to the last remaining Celtic areas of Britain, and in particular to Wales that still has retained many Celtic influences including its language.
The saxons often used Roman ruins, adding to them, restoring them, and are using bricks and stone. Even the Norman's did the same, the castle of colchester, the capital of Roman Britain, is a great example. But I agree, the church at Bradford does not look like any other Saxon church, and to my knowledge, the saxons never built anything so substantial out of stone, so early, the shape and height alone, screams Roman.
There were Roman buildings everywhere when the Saxons first took control. They would have built on the ruins, reused the material and repurposed many old buildings. It wouldnt be very shocking to me if this building was Roman. It also wouldnt surprise me if it were built by Saxons using Roman material and in the style of a roman building. Its just as interesting either way I look at it.
Those arches at 1:56 aren't bricked up big windows or doors. They're there to take some of the weight off the lintel. We have them over our bay window on a victorian house. If there was a window there you'd see into the room above.
The earliest part of St Declans Monastery was built 150 years after the Romans left Britain around 408 to 409 AD. It could not have been built by the Romans, who didn't even conquer Ireland. The Romanesque arches are typical of Norman architecture and this part of the building was apparently constructed in the 12th Century when the Anglo Normans were in Ireland and did have an influence on the architectural style of ecclesiastical buildings.
Charles there's far too many holes in our history in these areas you look into for it to be coincidence. I'm going through a massive revelation for want of a better word and starting to fit a lot together. I wish I had the time to explain here I really do as i think there would be a lot that would match some of your research and have you coming to some amazing conclusions.The closest I can get to explaining it is your work on the ancient civs being advanced is soooo much closer to accurate than you realise and I hope we get to see you justified. No way I could start to prove it but I just know. Too much of my own research from different sources adds up. It's beyond a lot of peoples comprehension and I know why they don't want us to know. God my heads spinning right now. Info overload the last few weeks. If I ever figure how to explain without taking hours babbling I will but. Keep at your stuff on Egypt, the Mayans, and the Sumarians. The spiritual stuff too. Tesla's work is also vital. If you ever felt like you suddenly had an awakening that helped you fit so many pieces together that did not before, I had one recently. It's actually making me start to look at things in a whole new light, my life included. The ancient knowledge holds vital keys for us.
Will Wilson I'd like to throw in the 536AD event. Search on Wikipedia and BBC did a documentary about tree rings. Ten years of minimal sunlight , famine, disease , perhaps anarchy? Followed by unification via Arthur. In this time blocks would have been reused everywhere. I think you're right about the arches Charles and the Saxons definitely built stuff with Roman stonework and then the Norman's took it on. The parliament picture is nuts. Stands to reason , if the version of events we were given in school is wrong.. ie that as a British people we fell apart after the Romans left. For me it was completely demoralising to hear that. If the collapse was due to catastrophe then I think people should know.
Andy Boddington Rings a bell that but the point we do know is that there is not much by way of records from the dark ages. To plunge the country into enough chaos to stop records being properly kept and maintained suggests a catastrophe of some kind for certain. There were also some recent ruins uncovered after the storms so my thinking is maybe something that was big enough to cause sea level rises at the same time that flooded the low lying coastal areas and never fully receded hence the ruins that only got uncovered after the storms. There's a lot more to our world history too than we're told. I have listened to many sources, some of which I never before would have even gone near as I thought them "New Age nonesense" for want of a better term but the alarming thing is, I started to get more consistency and stuff that so strangely started to fit together that it suddenly dawned that pretty much all we are taught is wrong. Check out Destroying the illusion channel and Destroying the illusion 2.0 Go in with an open mind for some of it especially but start checking other sources. I think you may end up having an awakening like I did that once it dawns, you may feel like you're getting a bit crazy at first but trust me, if you then start to consider where it fits into all religions, that's when it really hits you that things are very different. The holy books all have certain common things in them. Once you start to then understand that you will really start to go further and realise why we don't know. There are also some sources that give the exact reason we're suppressed too and believe me, I don't like it but I see exactly why it's done as at this point, the world would end up in chaos if they did not break it very carefully and even then, the world is going to be shaken on a level mankind has not seen. It would either destroy us or set us onto the next step in our races evolution and unite us once and for all in peace. That's a very dangerous gamble to take though i'm sure you understand but if you learn why it became a gamble, you will know also why I don't like it. Know this all sounds a little waffled but I work on the basis that yes, the truth is pretty out there so the only way to guarantee not being instantly brushed aside by most is point them in the right direction and let them learn independently. I'll give you one big insight I learned and I know it's true as I understand fully the principles as i'm trained in electronics. Antigravity exists and has since the 20's. If you think of Newton and the apple, think of antigravity as the idiot who stuck their finger in a plug and shot across the room. That is in layman's terms antigravity in action using electrostatic. Using that we also have a key to free energy, another suppressed tech.
Will Wilson- Have you seen seen this? ua-cam.com/video/GyKHF5KdWVA/v-deo.html (I copy pasted the URL so you can watch it by entering it in the VLC media player. and also you can record the videos this way, just FYI I record the videos I believe contain important information that might become a threat by exposing hidden knowledge and then be deleted) in your comment you say that you have a basic grasp on electronics, in that case you also must have many questions, gravity, magnetism, phase, light.... well this guy (with your open mind) will answer so much plus connect the dots being revealed to you. He mainly posts videos about photography, but just skip past that and spend time on his other videos, magnetism ect. name of the channel is Theoria Apophasis. P.S. I loved your comment!
The yellowy strange brick you refer to in Bath is Limestone. Quarried from the surrounding hills and originally formed by sediment on the bottom of the sea. I have to agree with your observations about the church in Bradford on Avon. It certainly looks Roman in origin. Well spotted.
Definitely not Roman. It was built in stages and different eras but it's earliest construction dates back to around 709 AD, or 300 years after the Romans left Britain. Major additions occurred in the late tenth or early eleventh century, and this might explain the Romanesque (not Roman) arcadian arches with what are actually typically Norman rounded arches.
Dr. Kos, Ive been a fan for a time now and while we dont see eye to eye on everything I appreciate your insights. Have you checked into El Mirador? Its a Mayan site thats still being excavated in Guatemala. They've found temples inside of temples (dating back to first millennium BC--and that's their dating) and guess whats used in the deepest and oldest temples? Megalithic stone blocks with bright colors painted on them. Also, have you checked out the sights along the Supe Valley in Peru (Caral and others)? Theyve dated them at 3000 BC but I believe theyre much older. If you look at the site from Google Earth there are multiple sites scattered with huge pyramids/temples inland of the Pacific coast. Simply amazing whats coming to light. Cheers!
"...since Adam was a boy..." Bravo. . . Bravo! But hold on, did you say "royal mullet?" That really strikes home... I must reflect on my dreams again...
Thanks for sharing this with us, Charles. When you said that "Rome never fell", did you just mean that the governmental system it pioneered lives on, or do you feel that the Empire legitimately lives on but by another name?
After the Roman's left Britain ( the legions not the people) bc the general populace were ancestors of the same Celts as when the Roman's first came. The Saxons arrived, so until mid 600s AD Britain was pagan No Christian churches existed until the 7th century. Interesting video, especially your ideas re: architectural archaeology . What makes you believe the churches are of Roman origin ? Is it an interest or hobby of yours ? I live in StAlbans Hertfordshire, the city named after Alban a Roman soldier who adopted christianity & had his head cut off because he wouldn't renounce his new found faith. ( 3rd c AD ) Bede writes about a church & describes were it was. 1996 I gained my BSc in field archaeology & have worked all around Britain since, mainly the area of StAlbans though. Some early Saxon churches remain, if I look out my bedroom window I can see a 9th century Saxon church. Very little survives that's original, the Normans added walls a porch widened the windows , altered the roof etc , typical Norman changes. Few Saxon churches remain intact ( if any) none of them , as far as I know have anything to do with the Romans. Although I have spent the past 10 or more years narrowing down my focus to the area I live, so its possible I've missed the latest archaeological info regarding the area of Bath . Although I'm sure one of my colleagues would have mentioned if a *Roman* era church had been identified recently. I'll check online at work on Monday ( I don't have access to all the files at home) and get back to you. I enjoyed the video, I've subscribed & look forward to watching more of your work. All the best Dr Charles 👍
Amazing and weird architecture! These seem to fit right in with your hypotheses on Colchester Castle and Tower of London. To me it feels like England rebuilding and reclaiming her national identity from Rome, utilizing but perhaps not necessarily being completely considerate and respectful of the older Roman achievements. As rude as it sounds, many old temples and churches are in fact bastardizations of even older structures. I think, just like after the fall of Rome, surviving people clung to these ancient places (literally megalithic foundations, the only things man can build that are almost eternal), modified them, renovated them, converted them from whatever they used to be, into whatever they wanted/needed at the time. Almost every sacred, holy, ancient place in the world is a bastardized conglomeration of successive peoples' habitation molded by their successive philosophies and world views. These time periods become compressed in our minds and we only see the structures as they appear today. Thanks for peeling back the layers on these buildings, I think you are absolutely correct and this same scenario can be seen in other ancient buildings all over the world!
Hi Andrew, your not far wrong in what you say about new buildings being adapted from earlier ones. 2 seasons ago I worked on a job in StAlbans , which revealed what was a Celtic chieftains seat ,the bottom ( oldest) archaeological layers, on top of which the Roman's built there administrative buildings ( stamping their new authority on top of the old) during Saxon times they then built a Saxon Christian church on top of the site of the old Roman power base. Majority of the Roman city was dismantled bricks etc stacked up & re-used ( recycled) by monks when building their monastery & abbey church/ cathedral .
Hello my friend! Thank you for that excellent video, and for giving us the benefit of your extensive knowledge and wisdom! I live in the rural North Yorkshire National Park, here in England, and you're exactly correct in saying that the churches here are often found to be constructed throughout different eras..... Absolutely love the style of your videos and the manner in which you narrate them.... simply a genius Sir!😉 I will bid you goodnight, and look forward to your future masterpieces!☺
I love watching them as well dude you "paint" a piece of a jigsaw to a 3D picture we need knowledge. thank you for your time. @11:00 odd in that picture there was a carving of a tree with people around it they did not look human anyone catch that sorry for the re-edit but theres more to that picture theres like figures in the top bit aswell it could be a story of some kind I want to go there now its only a few miles away..... upside down cross in the church very very old city........ jigsaw pieces bud...
good stuff, Saxons built their Burgh's in Roman walled towns, then the Normans built on top of that, good example is the White Tower of London, allegedly built by William the Bastard but on the remains of Roman Gatehouse into their Londinium, as seen on several coins from Constantine's reign
You are quite wrong, Mr Kos. The Romans were pagan until long after leaving here. I don't know which country you are from but those of us whose ancestors were here for millenia do know the history of our homeland. You are overreaching yourself. Even the i saac sons, their angels and ju tes were pagan for centuries before converting.
That church at the start wasn't 'Norman'. At least, the way you presented it anyway. You pointed out the point Gothic window for starters, which isn't Norman at all
You said we never build any new building in England and yet claim this church is the oldest Anglosaxon church in England. But its not, its actualy a quite new church built in the 10th century which is pretty new. The oldest Anglosaxon church in England is actually much older, its St Martins Canterbury and was built BEFORE 597 AD. 👀
We travelled from West Aussie via the space cake of bustling Amsterdam ending up in Ardmore one day en route for Pembrokeshire by raiding row boat. St Declans cell gave off love vibes not at all like the usual anal retentive hatred of life from the usual anchorites. Mournful flagellants blocking the love vibe of pagan Brigit.
I think you have reached one of the equinoxes... Exactly... any architect or archaeology has an argument. Tip is that it is viewed as dual. And that you are actually your own boss at so many levels.
yaay we have another legit roman building with the thousands of others..cover something important like the forced demographics of england or how the english have technically been going extinct since 2005 .
Dude - you say that Bradford-upon-Avon was Vortigern's capital. What evidence do you have to suggest this claim? Is it related to the myth that nearby Bath was supposedly Mons Badan? This claim is bogus. Totally. if so - Mons Badan was in the North, maybe Derbyshire, perhaps further North near the former Roman Legionary base of Carlisle or nearby along Hadrian's Wall. In Derbyshire there is Buxton - once called Bathamgate - a Roman Spa complex. Right now I cannot recall it - but for a detailed analysis and textual references see the book by Simon Keegan, author of 'Pennine Dragon' - in his follow up, 'The Lost Book of King Arthur' (2016). I would love to see your sources. If you have them - please reply with a link showing any evidence of Bradford-upon-Avon being Votigern's capital. I've read that maybe Gloucester was, and also it has been suggested to somewhere in Gwent or even Gwnedd. It's entirely possible that all three places, Bradford-upon-Avon, Gloucester and Gwent were the capital - wherever he laid his crown and throne was his home... And maybe some scholars have confused Gwent with Kent?...
Charles,, Bath is made from Cotswold Stone, honey coloured when new. Many of the old churches , have Roman masonry, bricks and tiles, mined or recycled from older buildings.
I must be more English than American, because I want to live in an old moss covered house in the woods. To me that would be perfect. That’s is my dream.
Maybe there wasn't a saxon invasion at all..maybe the people left britain during the dark age catastrophe as refugees to the saxon areas..picking up ideas and customs which they bought back with them when they returned to rebuild......
Hi everyone! Thanks for watching as always! Don't forget about the Tshirt Comp! You can win a signed copy of my book plus i'll send you the Tshirt you designed! ua-cam.com/video/QkozCpyvQrs/v-deo.html Let's have some more entries! Woooohoooo!
Mate I'm the worst artist ever so unfortunately this ones not for me or I would have entered. I'm bad at even drawing stick men, lol.
Charles Kos 😃I am in Hereford right now and planning for a week in london 👍 If You Will be there we Can have a drink 🍷🍷
Yes It's a beautiful and clearly a mid evil remanent of a Roman conquered area. Myself and my followers, as well as many other channels I produce have been very interested in your work, yet this is the third or maybe fourth time you've put forth what is clearly Norman/Saxon...taken over by The Romans. Clearly the Saxons used the Roman workings. What confuses me and many of my followers is what and or why do you continue on with such, when it's very clear and nothing more then a natural Celtic/Saxon remodeling/beautiful strong structured building. The layers and or arches are clear and there p, as well as taken over by the latter. As a big fan of yours that gives to you many likes and views, from the feed back I'm getting, it'd be great and very successful for you to start treating and producing more intellectually based hypothesis of these ideologies. Thank you for all your work from myself and my many channels whom bring you many more views due to our sharing and giving you your own playlists. It's clear to use your knowledge to prove that archeology is NOT what we've been told and there's much much more hidden in plain site. You have the potential and now the resources to start announcing the actualities amongst all you've explored and made clear, yet you leave things for others to try and configure. If you'd like your book to be a best seller use the truth and knowledge you base your findings on and publishing will be like like a drink of water. Again. Ty for all your hard work and time spent. It's a pleasure spreading your work, as long as it comes with a hypothesis worth further inquiries and not just "up in the air," figure it out for yourselves guys. If you're willing, make your thesis and then you'll have the monetary and furthermore backing you'll need. These chances come once in a lifetime. Your work in Michigan and the lakes/flooded areas are on point and true to a fact. Cheers back to you Charles, but give us something to actually toast to as opposed to leaving all your work up to hearsay. Thanks again...GW
Heya Dr Charles , interesting video so far , ( almost half way through) although I need to watch again from beginning because I must've missed what the name of the church is.
Some notes:
1. This is a Romanesque building: that is, one inspired by and reflecting the architecture and décor of buildings of the Roman period. We should expect it to show some 'Roman' features, especially if it reuses Roman stone.
2. The Anglo-Saxon period lasted several centuries and we should expect differences between buildings of that period constructed (and altered) at different times, in different areas, under varying patronage, with varying resources and varying levels of craftsmanship.
3. I wasn't aware of a claim that this is the UK's oldest Saxon church, but since the building was rediscovered there has been a strong tradition of suggesting it was built by, i.e. under the auspices of, St Aldhelm in the late seventh century. This rested on a statement made by the historian William of Malmesbury - writing in the tweflth century - that Aldhelm built a church at Bradford which was still standing in his (William's) day. The identification of this building as that built by Aldhelm rests on two rather shaky assumptions - a) that the church to which William refers as still standing was this building and b) that William was correct in stating that the church still standing in his day was the one built several centuries before by St Aldhelm.
4. I am likely out-of-date with the scholarly analysis of this building but, to massively summarise important expert articles (I don't have the references to hand), opinion has moved towards this being not a seventh-century building but a late Anglo-Saxon one, of the late tenth or early eleventh century, with some alterations to the windows carried out perhaps not very long after construction.
5. My brain cannot help making connections. My view, which I think would count as 'perfectly plausible but not provable', is as follows. I) It is perfectly possible that Aldhelm founded an early minster at Bradford. Any remains of that would likely be under, and/or perhaps in part incorporated in, the present main parish church. II) In 1001 King Aethelred granted Bradford to the nuns of Shaftesbury. They had the body/relics of Aethelred's brother Edward, whose death had allowed Aethelred to come to the throne. III) Edward was canonised: his remains were said to perform miracles. IV) The architecture of this building seems to belong to almost exactly this time, and it is probable that the building was intended as a mausoleum for Edward's royal (and saintly) remains, explaining its ornate (for the period and location) style. Another popular theory is that it was simply built as a church for the nuns, who would have needed one if they did indeed move temporarily to Bradford.
Absolutely correct Jonathan. The Romanesque blind arcading, he describes as roman arches, is Norman in style. The blind arches are not Roman but just built in a Roman style, we call Romanesque. There is evidence to show that this "layer" of the building was added later. Norman arches are typically rounded in style and this extension to the building has been made on top of the noticeably different ground level construction with its Saxon style narrow windows. The building dates to a period that is at least 300 years after the Romans left Britain. It's thought that the earliest construction dates to around 709 AD with most of the construction, as you say being in the late 10th or early 11th Century.
Bede indicated that the Saxons used Roman buildings. So, this appears to be both Roman and Saxon.
I would love to spend a summer in southern England just going around to all the small towns and visiting the pubs and I'm not a regular pub goer.
You seem to be describing the Early English architectural style (pointed arches) as Norman (semi-circular). Also, as far as I am aware, there is no evidence of the Saxons having lead lined windows.
No, but it was not uncommon to glaze windows or cloisters supported by lead cames in later centuries and cut the necessary rebates into the stone.
So let's recap the Saxons took an existing structure and made it a place of worship? So it's a very old Saxon church, probably not the oldest that,I believe, is St. Martin's at Canterbury which in part is built on and with bit's of, a Roman building. Another example is the Saxon church at Dover castle in which bits of the adjacent Roman lighthouse can be found.
Most old Parish churches in England were extended or refurbished down through the ages and in one way or another reflect the architecture of each period.
So this is one of the oldest Saxon churches in Englanf because the saxons took an existing structure and with a few alterations made it into a church...Hope this helps!
We have Romanesque arches all over England in many ruins. Old builds repurposed by new arrivals.
Curved arches are not just Roman but they are also a major characteristic of Norman architecture. The Anglo Normans did invade Ireland. The Romans never conquered Ireland although they may have traded with the Irish. The so called "Irish" or Celtic designs in the Church are Celtic. Celtic designs are common in this part of the West Country and its proximity to the last remaining Celtic areas of Britain, and in particular to Wales that still has retained many Celtic influences including its language.
Agreed. Those arches look early Norman to me.
The saxons often used Roman ruins, adding to them, restoring them, and are using bricks and stone. Even the Norman's did the same, the castle of colchester, the capital of Roman Britain, is a great example. But I agree, the church at Bradford does not look like any other Saxon church, and to my knowledge, the saxons never built anything so substantial out of stone, so early, the shape and height alone, screams Roman.
There were Roman buildings everywhere when the Saxons first took control. They would have built on the ruins, reused the material and repurposed many old buildings. It wouldnt be very shocking to me if this building was Roman. It also wouldnt surprise me if it were built by Saxons using Roman material and in the style of a roman building. Its just as interesting either way I look at it.
St Peter's on the Wall was built on top of a Roman fort. It's a lovely little Church.
Those arches at 1:56 aren't bricked up big windows or doors. They're there to take some of the weight off the lintel. We have them over our bay window on a victorian house. If there was a window there you'd see into the room above.
The earliest part of St Declans Monastery was built 150 years after the Romans left Britain around 408 to 409 AD. It could not have been built by the Romans, who didn't even conquer Ireland. The Romanesque arches are typical of Norman architecture and this part of the building was apparently constructed in the 12th Century when the Anglo Normans were in Ireland and did have an influence on the architectural style of ecclesiastical buildings.
This one is probably my second favorite of your videos so far. The first one is POLYGONAL MEGALITHIC INCA WALLS . You have a keen eye .
Woooohooo thanks Cherrygummybear!
Charles Kos
A thought from another point of view. Could one group have renovated the others building and created a mix of architecture?
For sure that's a great idea! That might have happened to the tower of London as well.
Charles there's far too many holes in our history in these areas you look into for it to be coincidence. I'm going through a massive revelation for want of a better word and starting to fit a lot together. I wish I had the time to explain here I really do as i think there would be a lot that would match some of your research and have you coming to some amazing conclusions.The closest I can get to explaining it is your work on the ancient civs being advanced is soooo much closer to accurate than you realise and I hope we get to see you justified. No way I could start to prove it but I just know. Too much of my own research from different sources adds up. It's beyond a lot of peoples comprehension and I know why they don't want us to know. God my heads spinning right now. Info overload the last few weeks. If I ever figure how to explain without taking hours babbling I will but. Keep at your stuff on Egypt, the Mayans, and the Sumarians. The spiritual stuff too. Tesla's work is also vital. If you ever felt like you suddenly had an awakening that helped you fit so many pieces together that did not before, I had one recently. It's actually making me start to look at things in a whole new light, my life included. The ancient knowledge holds vital keys for us.
Will Wilson I'd like to throw in the 536AD event. Search on Wikipedia and BBC did a documentary about tree rings. Ten years of minimal sunlight , famine, disease , perhaps anarchy? Followed by unification via Arthur. In this time blocks would have been reused everywhere. I think you're right about the arches Charles and the Saxons definitely built stuff with Roman stonework and then the Norman's took it on. The parliament picture is nuts. Stands to reason , if the version of events we were given in school is wrong.. ie that as a British people we fell apart after the Romans left. For me it was completely demoralising to hear that. If the collapse was due to catastrophe then I think people should know.
Andy Boddington
Rings a bell that but the point we do know is that there is not much by way of records from the dark ages. To plunge the country into enough chaos to stop records being properly kept and maintained suggests a catastrophe of some kind for certain. There were also some recent ruins uncovered after the storms so my thinking is maybe something that was big enough to cause sea level rises at the same time that flooded the low lying coastal areas and never fully receded hence the ruins that only got uncovered after the storms. There's a lot more to our world history too than we're told. I have listened to many sources, some of which I never before would have even gone near as I thought them "New Age nonesense" for want of a better term but the alarming thing is, I started to get more consistency and stuff that so strangely started to fit together that it suddenly dawned that pretty much all we are taught is wrong. Check out Destroying the illusion channel and Destroying the illusion 2.0 Go in with an open mind for some of it especially but start checking other sources. I think you may end up having an awakening like I did that once it dawns, you may feel like you're getting a bit crazy at first but trust me, if you then start to consider where it fits into all religions, that's when it really hits you that things are very different. The holy books all have certain common things in them. Once you start to then understand that you will really start to go further and realise why we don't know. There are also some sources that give the exact reason we're suppressed too and believe me, I don't like it but I see exactly why it's done as at this point, the world would end up in chaos if they did not break it very carefully and even then, the world is going to be shaken on a level mankind has not seen. It would either destroy us or set us onto the next step in our races evolution and unite us once and for all in peace. That's a very dangerous gamble to take though i'm sure you understand but if you learn why it became a gamble, you will know also why I don't like it. Know this all sounds a little waffled but I work on the basis that yes, the truth is pretty out there so the only way to guarantee not being instantly brushed aside by most is point them in the right direction and let them learn independently. I'll give you one big insight I learned and I know it's true as I understand fully the principles as i'm trained in electronics. Antigravity exists and has since the 20's. If you think of Newton and the apple, think of antigravity as the idiot who stuck their finger in a plug and shot across the room. That is in layman's terms antigravity in action using electrostatic. Using that we also have a key to free energy, another suppressed tech.
Will Wilson- Have you seen seen this? ua-cam.com/video/GyKHF5KdWVA/v-deo.html (I copy pasted the URL so you can watch it by entering it in the VLC media player. and also you can record the videos this way, just FYI I record the videos I believe contain important information that might become a threat by exposing hidden knowledge and then be deleted) in your comment you say that you have a basic grasp on electronics, in that case you also must have many questions, gravity, magnetism, phase, light.... well this guy (with your open mind) will answer so much plus connect the dots being revealed to you. He mainly posts videos about photography, but just skip past that and spend time on his other videos, magnetism ect. name of the channel is Theoria Apophasis. P.S. I loved your comment!
Good video. What happened to your Mac?
Bradford on Avon looks beautiful. Some great points and as always , passionate, interesting and thought provoking.
It sure is! Thanks Sea Pea!
The yellowy strange brick you refer to in Bath is Limestone. Quarried from the surrounding hills and originally formed by sediment on the bottom of the sea.
I have to agree with your observations about the church in Bradford on Avon. It certainly looks Roman in origin. Well spotted.
Definitely not Roman. It was built in stages and different eras but it's earliest construction dates back to around 709 AD, or 300 years after the Romans left Britain. Major additions occurred in the late tenth or early eleventh century, and this might explain the Romanesque (not Roman) arcadian arches with what are actually typically Norman rounded arches.
Dr. Kos, Ive been a fan for a time now and while we dont see eye to eye on everything I appreciate your insights. Have you checked into El Mirador? Its a Mayan site thats still being excavated in Guatemala. They've found temples inside of temples (dating back to first millennium BC--and that's their dating) and guess whats used in the deepest and oldest temples? Megalithic stone blocks with bright colors painted on them. Also, have you checked out the sights along the Supe Valley in Peru (Caral and others)? Theyve dated them at 3000 BC but I believe theyre much older. If you look at the site from Google Earth there are multiple sites scattered with huge pyramids/temples inland of the Pacific coast. Simply amazing whats coming to light. Cheers!
"...since Adam was a boy..."
Bravo. . . Bravo!
But hold on, did you say "royal mullet?" That really strikes home... I must reflect on my dreams again...
Thanks for sharing this with us, Charles. When you said that "Rome never fell", did you just mean that the governmental system it pioneered lives on, or do you feel that the Empire legitimately lives on but by another name?
Thanks for watching comradeharley!
After the Roman's left Britain ( the legions not the people) bc the general populace were ancestors of the same Celts as when the Roman's first came.
The Saxons arrived, so until mid 600s AD Britain was pagan
No Christian churches existed until the 7th century.
Interesting video,
especially your ideas re: architectural archaeology .
What makes you believe the churches are of Roman origin ?
Is it an interest or hobby of yours ?
I live in StAlbans Hertfordshire, the city named after Alban a Roman soldier who adopted christianity & had his head cut off because he wouldn't renounce his new found faith. ( 3rd c AD )
Bede writes about a church & describes were it was.
1996 I gained my BSc in field archaeology & have worked all around Britain since, mainly the area of StAlbans though.
Some early Saxon churches remain, if I look out my bedroom window I can see a 9th century Saxon church.
Very little survives that's original, the Normans added walls a porch widened the windows , altered the roof etc , typical Norman changes.
Few Saxon churches remain intact ( if any) none of them , as far as I know have anything to do with the Romans.
Although I have spent the past 10 or more years narrowing down my focus to the area I live, so its possible I've missed the latest archaeological info regarding the area of Bath .
Although I'm sure one of my colleagues would have mentioned if a *Roman* era church had been identified recently.
I'll check online at work on Monday ( I don't have access to all the files at home) and get back to you.
I enjoyed the video, I've subscribed & look forward to watching more of your work.
All the best Dr Charles 👍
As always great video. Thanks Dr. Kos. Also great second channel. Cheers from poland.
Thanks! Cześć, Vlad!
Love those weird walls!!! Bizarre mixtures......... Brilliant.
Awesome, great dental exhibition, too! 😅
Cool stuff, thanks for expanding my view.
Amazing and weird architecture! These seem to fit right in with your hypotheses on Colchester Castle and Tower of London. To me it feels like England rebuilding and reclaiming her national identity from Rome, utilizing but perhaps not necessarily being completely considerate and respectful of the older Roman achievements.
As rude as it sounds, many old temples and churches are in fact bastardizations of even older structures.
I think, just like after the fall of Rome, surviving people clung to these ancient places (literally megalithic foundations, the only things man can build that are almost eternal), modified them, renovated them, converted them from whatever they used to be, into whatever they wanted/needed at the time.
Almost every sacred, holy, ancient place in the world is a bastardized conglomeration of successive peoples' habitation molded by their successive philosophies and world views. These time periods become compressed in our minds and we only see the structures as they appear today.
Thanks for peeling back the layers on these buildings, I think you are absolutely correct and this same scenario can be seen in other ancient buildings all over the world!
Hi Andrew, your not far wrong in what you say about new buildings being adapted from earlier ones.
2 seasons ago I worked on a job in StAlbans , which revealed what was a Celtic chieftains seat ,the bottom ( oldest) archaeological layers, on top of which the Roman's built there administrative buildings ( stamping their new authority on top of the old) during Saxon times they then built a Saxon Christian church on top of the site of the old Roman power base.
Majority of the Roman city was dismantled bricks etc stacked up & re-used ( recycled) by monks when building their monastery & abbey church/ cathedral .
Hello my friend!
Thank you for that excellent video, and for giving us the benefit of your extensive knowledge and wisdom!
I live in the rural North Yorkshire National Park, here in England, and you're exactly correct in saying that the churches here are often found to be constructed throughout different eras.....
Absolutely love the style of your videos and the manner in which you narrate them.... simply a genius Sir!😉
I will bid you goodnight, and look forward to your future masterpieces!☺
It's inspired by the architecture of the late Saxon times, Carolingian Romanesque
Good work again mate
Keep em coming
I love watching them as well dude you "paint" a piece of a jigsaw to a 3D picture we need knowledge. thank you for your time. @11:00 odd in that picture there was a carving of a tree with people around it they did not look human anyone catch that sorry for the re-edit but theres more to that picture theres like figures in the top bit aswell it could be a story of some kind I want to go there now its only a few miles away..... upside down cross in the church very very old city........ jigsaw pieces bud...
Thanks Wooohoooo!
good stuff, Saxons built their Burgh's in Roman walled towns, then the Normans built on top of that, good example is the White Tower of London, allegedly built by William the Bastard but on the remains of Roman Gatehouse into their Londinium, as seen on several coins from Constantine's reign
You are quite wrong, Mr Kos.
The Romans were pagan until long after leaving here. I don't know which country you are from but those of us whose ancestors were here for millenia do know the history of our homeland. You are overreaching yourself. Even the i saac sons, their angels and ju tes were pagan for centuries before converting.
Mayan temples seem to be made in stages. You have an old temple at the very center and a newer one built over it.
Saxons done this to many of our ancient monuments
Thank You Charles !
so interesting !!
Another "hit" ... Good on ya Chuck
That church at the start wasn't 'Norman'. At least, the way you presented it anyway. You pointed out the point Gothic window for starters, which isn't Norman at all
Ok so you see, nobody was asking your opinion. That's a fact, Jack!
You said we never build any new building in England and yet claim this church is the oldest Anglosaxon church in England.
But its not, its actualy a quite new church built in the 10th century which is pretty new. The oldest Anglosaxon church in England is actually much older, its St Martins Canterbury and was built BEFORE 597 AD. 👀
Great stuff as always
Thanks Chris!
Didn't you already do a video on this? (Watching now)
God I hope I didn't! Haha! If so memory fail!
You would Love Leicester and Peterborough Charles
We travelled from West Aussie via the space cake of bustling Amsterdam ending up in Ardmore one day en route for Pembrokeshire by raiding row boat. St Declans cell gave off love vibes not at all like the usual anal retentive hatred of life from the usual anchorites. Mournful flagellants blocking the love vibe of pagan Brigit.
Your vids are my visuals to Colleen McCullough books on Rome & Caesars:-):-):-):-)
OMG!
8::43 ice age squirrel
I think you have reached one of the equinoxes...
Exactly... any architect or archaeology has an argument.
Tip is that it is viewed as dual.
And that you are actually your own boss at so many levels.
Very disappointing lack of knowledge, pretending he has. His opinion is as valuable as anyone else’s I suppose. But opinions are not evidence.
Why you give your opinion then?
I am thinking that Kos has got it wright. Over,
An Australian 🤣🤣🤣🤣
That is clearly not Roman. It's Pict.
Boom Dos Picts were still the far end of Scotland at that time! My paternal ancestors were from a Pictish area - Scotland. Not the SW of England.
Ill do some dowsing and up load a video to show u 😋
Wooooohoooooo can't wait to see that!!!!!!!!!!!! When you post links youtube sometimes spams them so break them up
yaay we have another legit roman building with the thousands of others..cover something important like the forced demographics of england or how the english have technically been going extinct since 2005 .
Dude - you say that Bradford-upon-Avon was Vortigern's capital. What evidence do you have to suggest this claim? Is it related to the myth that nearby Bath was supposedly Mons Badan? This claim is bogus. Totally. if so - Mons Badan was in the North, maybe Derbyshire, perhaps further North near the former Roman Legionary base of Carlisle or nearby along Hadrian's Wall. In Derbyshire there is Buxton - once called Bathamgate - a Roman Spa complex. Right now I cannot recall it - but for a detailed analysis and textual references see the book by Simon Keegan, author of 'Pennine Dragon' - in his follow up, 'The Lost Book of King Arthur' (2016). I would love to see your sources. If you have them - please reply with a link showing any evidence of Bradford-upon-Avon being Votigern's capital. I've read that maybe Gloucester was, and also it has been suggested to somewhere in Gwent or even Gwnedd. It's entirely possible that all three places, Bradford-upon-Avon, Gloucester and Gwent were the capital - wherever he laid his crown and throne was his home... And maybe some scholars have confused Gwent with Kent?...
Great selfies, love the inclusion in the videos, keep up the great videos :D
All the church towers are on energy lines.... U should do some dowsing and u will see
Charles,, Bath is made from Cotswold Stone, honey coloured when new. Many of the old churches , have Roman masonry, bricks and tiles, mined or recycled from older buildings.
I must be more English than American, because I want to live in an old moss covered house in the woods. To me that would be perfect. That’s is my dream.
Is this a comedy? 🤣
You say something dumb every 5 seconds
Maybe there wasn't a saxon invasion at all..maybe the people left britain during the dark age catastrophe as refugees to the saxon areas..picking up ideas and customs which they bought back with them when they returned to rebuild......
Wonderful idea!
Expose