P. N. Oak claimed the British Isles were “once ruled by India” and that there is “a broken chain of clues” supporting this theory.
When, therefore, we assert that ancient England and the British Isles were once ruled by India it should not cause and resentment to anybody.
The story of India’s vanished and forgotten empire can be reconstructed by the same method by which students at examinations fill-up the missing words in a broken sentence.
Obliterated history can be rewritten by diving missing links in a broken chain of clues.
Some Missing Chapters of World History – P. N. Oak – 2010 Edition
If P. N. Oak is correct [or even on the right track] then the British Isles should contain some ancient cultural artefacts that associate Britain with India.
Therefore, it’s worth skimming through the British ancient artefact archives looking for overlooked, obscured or wilfully forgotten missing links from ancient India such as:
White Horses, Flying Horses, Sacred Cattle, Swastikas, Lingams and Brahmi inscriptions.
The Uffington White Horse could easily qualify as a missing link.
The Uffington White Horse is a highly stylised prehistoric hill figure, 110 m (360 ft) long, formed from deep trenches filled with crushed white chalk.
Recent work by the Oxford Archaeological Unit has indicated that the White Horse was most probably created in the Late Bronze Age, at some point between 1400 and 600 B.C.E.
The new date range, along with the revelation that the figure is not simply scraped into the chalk of the hillside but consists of trenches filled with loose chalk, has ast doubt upon much that was previously considered certain.
The Scouring of the White Horse: Archaeology, Identity, and “Heritage”
Representations, Vol. 65 Winter, 1999; (pp. 42-62)
Bronze coins from Kent [with a “bull in rude outline”] could also be a missing link.
The first coinage produced in Kent were cast and not struck and are named the “Cast Bronzes” (30-35).
These were cast between 100-90 BC and were made with Bronze rather than more precious metals.
Celtic coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet – Scott Ross – 2011 – University of Glasgow
More generally, early British coins provide numerous examples of horses and flying horses.
The Phoenician Origin of Britons, Scots & Anglo-Saxons
Laurence Austine Waddell -1924
Date And Origin.
It will have been seen from the preceding chapter that there has been a considerable difference of opinion among those who have treated of this subject, as to the date at which a
knowledge of the art of coining was introduced into Britain ; and that some writers have even gone the length of denying the existence of any ancient British coinage at all.
As it would be superfluous to insist on the fact, now universally admitted by Numismatists, that a British coinage did once exist, I shall confine myself in the present chapter to an attempt to determine the epoch of its commencement.
Taking, then, all these circumstances into consideration, we should not greatly err if on the evidence already before us we assign to these, the earliest of the British coins, a date
somewhere between 150 to 200 b.c.
The Coins of the Ancient Britons – John Evans – 1864
Coins of the Ancient Britons – John Evans – 1890
The Burghead Bulls might be another missing link.
Burghead Fort was a Pictish promontory fort on the site now occupied by the small town of Burghead in Moray, Scotland.
The fort was probably the main centre of the Pictish Kingdom of Fortriu, flourishing like the kingdom itself from the 4th to the 9th centuries.
During the destruction of the site in the early 19th century up to thirty stone panels carrying carved images of bulls were discovered.
The Bulls have been dated to the 5th century or later and may have formed a frieze set into the ramparts of the fort, possibly forming part of a warrior cult celebrating strength and aggression.
Whilst there are numerous examples of swastikas in Britain.
The Swastika Stone is a stone adorned with a Swastika located on the Woodhouse Crag, on the northern edge of Ilkley Moor in West Yorkshire.
Each of the Stone’s arms point to compass points; due north – within one degree – towards Simon’s Seat, close to Bolton Abbey; east, towards Almscliff Crag, while the tenth rogue cup, also easterly, has long been thought to point to the position of the sun at the dawning of the summer solstice.
Shedding New Light On Ilkley’s Swastika Stone – Hickes, Martin
Then there is the Newton Stone.
For the modern mainstream this enigmatic “pillar stone” contains a second script that “has never been positively identified” and is probably a hoax.
The Newton Stone is a pillar stone, found in Aberdeenshire, Scotland.
The stone contains two inscriptions, one, written in Ogham, but the second script has never been positively identified and many different decipherments or theories have been proposed since the 1860s.
The second script may have been added to the stone as recent as the late 18th or beginning of the 19th century.
Ogham is an Early Medieval alphabet used to write the early Irish language (in the so-called “orthodox” inscriptions, 1st to 6th centuries), and later the Old Irish language (so-called scholastic ogham, 6th to 9th centuries).
For others the Newton Stone is a two metre high phallus with a second inscription in Brahmi script [or derivative thereof – see table below] which includes a clear depiction of a swastika.
The Newton Stone – The Right Hon. The Earl Of Southesk – 1882
On the whole the evidence, both technical and petrological, seems to be so clearly in favour of the authenticity of the inscription that it can be confidently handed back to the consideration of scholars.
Carving Technique on the Symbol Stones of North-East Scotland
C. A. Gordon – 1956 – Proc Soc Antiq Scot lxxxviii: 40-46
Academics in the 19th century happily debated which [of the many] Brahmi script derivatives was actually inscribed on the Newton Stone.
William Mill determined “the inscription was in the Phoenician character” whilst a Colonel Sykes noticed affinities with the “ancient Lât Alphabet of the Buddhists”.
More recently, a correct copy of the inscription was submitted to Dr. Mill, late Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge, and one of the most profound eastern scholars of recent times.
Dr. Mill, at the time of his lamented death, had all but completed a dissertation on the language of the inscription, and an explanation of its meaning.
It appeared to him that the inscription was in the Phoenician character, and commemorated a sacrifice.
It is to be hoped that this learned dissertation will yet come to light.
Its conclusions received confirmation in the Author’s own mind, from the circumstance that he believed he had found all the more unusual forms of the Newton inscription on pottery discovered by Mr. Liyard at Babylon.
Even to unlearned eyes, the remarkable character of this inscription suggests strong resemblances to eastern alphabets: and in the Enchorial alphabet from Persepolis, given in Forster’s “Harmony of Primeval Alphabets,” several of the letters seem identical.
Colonel Sykes also thought he could observe an identity between some of the letters of the inscription and those of the ancient Lât Alphabet of the Buddhists.
Sculptured Stones of Scotland – John Stuart – 1856
William Hodge Mill (1792–1853) was an English churchman and orientalist, the first principal of Bishop’s College, Calcutta and later Regius Professor of Hebrew at Cambridge.
Other 19th century suggestions incuded: debased Latin, mediaeval Latin, Greek, Gaelic, Gnostic symbolism, Hebrew-Bactrian and Sinaitic.
Cambridge is closely connected with the story of this baffling inscription.
A full discussion of it took place at the meeting of the British Association at Cambridge in 1862, when I was still living in Perthshire.
Mr Thomas Wright maintained that it was debased Latin ; he read the first two lines hic iacet Constantinus, and later on he saw filius and the name of Constantine’s father Constantius Chlorus in the genitive.
Simonides at the same meeting said it was Greek, but gave it the same meaning as Mr Wright.
Dr Davis, the explorer of Carthage, said it was Phoenician, and made it mean a great deal.
A learned Celtic scholar made it mean, among other things, “the boundary of the royal field.”
Mr Vaux of the British Museum declared it to be mediaeval Latin.
Professor Aufrecht believed it to be Phoenician.
The Minister of Public Instruction in Italy brought it before the Academy at Turin ; the Academy pronounced it to be the work of a wag.
Chapter 10 – The Newton Stone
On Some Antiquities In The Neighbourhood Of Dunecht House, Aberdeenshire.
G. F. Browne – 1921 – Cambridge University Press
In 1865 the antiquarian Alexander Thomson read a paper to the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland addressing five decipherment theories:
Phoenician (Nathan Davis, Theodor Aufrecht, William Mill)
Gaelic (an unnamed correspondent of Thomson’s)
Latin (Thomas Wright, William Vaux)
Greek (Constantine Simonides)
Gnostic symbolism (John O. Westwood)
Additionally, George Moore proposed a Hebrew-Bactrian translation, while Thomson mentions another scholar who likened the unknown inscription to Sinaitic.
But the Academic Ostriches got their feathers really twisted when Laurence Waddell had the temerity to publish his Out of India ideas in 1924.
There were some manifest advantages in attacking the problem from its eastern end.
Philologists, ethnologists and anthropologists were generally agreed that the eastern branch of the ancient ruling Aryan race in India had presumably preserved in the Sanskrit dialect a purer form of the original Aryan speech than was to found in the European dialects, from Greek to Gothic and English ; whilst they also preserved a great body of traditional literature regarding the original location, doings and achievements of the Early Aryan which had been lost by the western or European branch in the vicissitudes and destructive turmoil of long ages of migration and internecine wars.
Lieutenant Colonel Laurence Austine Waddell, CB, CIE, F.L.S., L.L.D, M.Ch., I.M.S. RAI, F.R.A.S (1854–1938) was a British explorer, Professor of Tibetan, Professor of Chemistry and Pathology, Indian Army surgeon, collector in Tibet, and amateur archaeologist.
Waddell also studied Sumerian and Sanskrit; he made various translations of seals and other inscriptions.
His reputation as a Assyriologist gained little to no academic recognition and his books on the history of civilization have caused controversy.
Some of his book publications however were popular with the public, and he is regarded by some today to have been a real-life precursor of the fictitious character Indiana Jones.
Laurence Waddell however as late as 1924 offered another radical decipherment as Hitto-Phoenician.
His work was strongly criticized.
Which is all very strange because [apart from everything else] Indian coins still managed to migrate Out of India to Britain [plus Estonia, Germany, Poland and Russia] until sometime between 750 AD and 1050 AD [along with the occasional Indian Buddha that migrated to Sweden].
Indian silver coins in Viking-age northern Europe & Britain
Caitlin Green – 27 December 2014
Portable Antiquities Scheme
Plus ça change.
In support of his theory P. N. Oak argued British place names [and places of worship] provided some of the missing links that connect Britain to India.
Ancient Hindu Towns and Temples in England
Another very strong indication is that the English termination “shire” is a corrupt form of the Sanskrit word ‘shwar’.
That is to say as we have in India townships consecrating ancient Shiva temples known as Tryambakeshwar, Lankeshwar, Mahabaleshwar, Garhmukteshwar we have in England ancient Shiva temple sites still known by their ancient terminations like Lancashire, Pembrokeshire, Hampshire and Wilshire.
Likewise the termination ‘bury’ in English townships as in Salisbury, Waterbury, Canterbury is the ancient Sanskrit term ‘pury’ reminiscent of the ties when England was a Hindu country.
In India and in Siam (which was also a Hindu country) we still have townships known as Sudamapury, Krishnapury and Cholpury. In Siam it is Cholbury and Rajpury.
The fancied English name ‘Salisbury’ is Sanskrit, being ‘Shail-eesh-pury’ i.e. ‘Township of the Mountain God Lord Shiva’, obviously indicating that Salisbury is located in a hilly region.
This can be physically verified with reference to current or ancient topographical maps.
The Wiltshire area, in which is located Stonehenge, obviously indicates the existence there of an ancient Hindu Shivs temple as is apparent from its ‘shire’ ending meaning ‘Eshwar’ i.e. Lord Shiva.
Salisbury’s hilly topography is also proof that it is a corrupt form of the Sanskrit term ‘Shail-eesh-pury’ exactly signifying a hilly area and a Hindu temple.
This is a very tiny, but a very significant pointer to the Hindu heritage of ancient England.
A parallel can be cited in distant Malaysia where the town Sungei Pattani is Sanskrit Shringa Pattan (i.e. a mountain town) and Petaling Jaya is ‘Sphatik Linga Jayan’ i.e. the Great Crystal (white) Shiva Linga (now turned mosque).
If archaeology excavations are undertaken around Petaling Jaya’s ancient-most mosque it is bound to prove the mosque to be a Shiva temple.
We may now consider the origin of the word ‘England’ itself.
To trace its Sanskrit origin let us first note that the Sanskrit word ‘Granthi’ continues to be spelled in English as ‘gland’.
Similarly the word ‘stand’ as in ‘lamp-stand’ is the Sanskrit word ‘sthan’ i.e. ‘place’.
This indicates that the Sanskrit termination ‘nth’ or ‘than’ has changed into ‘and’ in English.
Let us now go back to the ancient atlas in which the ancient Hindus designated their own land as ‘Sindhu-sthan’ (i.e. ‘Indus-land’) and other countries as Afghanistan, Baluchistan, Turaga-shan (modern Turkey), and Arva-sthan (modern Arabia).
Likewise they had designated the English isles as ‘Anglasthan’ a name still used in Sanskrit.
That ‘Angla’ not ‘English’ was the original Sanskrit name of the English people may be verified from the terms ‘Angles’ and ‘Anglo Saxons’ and ‘Anglais’ used by the French.
Therefore ‘Angla:sthan’ became ‘Anglaland’ which in modern parlance has changed to ‘England’.
From this it is apparent that ‘Britain’ is the corrupt form of the Sanskrit term ‘Brihat sthan’ and the words ‘British’ and ‘Britannic’ which have the same origin are Sanskrit terms.
‘Brihat sthan’ signifies ‘Great Isles’.
But forgetting the original Sanskrit significance of the term ‘Britain’ meaning ‘Big or Great Isles’ English usage mistakenly repeats the adjective in terming their land ‘Great Britain’.
This has also happened elsewhere in the world.
Towns and other localities ending in ‘ton’ or ‘ston’ as in ‘Shireston, Hampton, Kesington’ denote the Sanskrit termination ‘Sthan’.
Shireston, from the derivation explained above, obviously is ‘Eeshwar sthan’ i.e. ‘a place temple or township of Lord Shiva.
Some Missing Chapters of World History – P. N. Oak – 2010 Edition