Britons International

Directions Website

Britons International Llywelyn UthyrPendragon

International political movement for the restoration of factual world history, de jure governments, and the equity and freedoms derived from ancient and unalienable rights.

10/08/2026

Behold! The ever-changing version of the Windsor claim to sovereignty and the UK version of history.

Please, consider home schooling.

10/08/2026

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿England: The 'Welsh' King Arthur of Britain is a myth!!! The Welsh invented him so that they could have an illustrious history and made up claim to sovereignty in Britain.

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿Also England: Arthur of Brittany, nephew of Richard I and John
Arthur Plantagenet, illegitimate son of Edward VI
Arthur Tudor, son of Henry VII
Arthur, Duke of Rothway, son of James V
Arthur of Rothway, grandson of James V
Arthur, Duke of Connaught, son of Victoria
Arthur of Connaught, grand-son of Victoria.
Charles Philip Arthur George, son of Elizabeth Saxe Coburg Gotha Windsor Mountbatten
William Arthur Philip Louis Mountbatten-Windsor, grandson of Elizabeth Saxe Coburg Gotha Windsor Mountbatten
Louis Arthur Charles, great grandson of Elizabeth Saxe Coburg Gotha Windsor
_______________________________
Edward I and the Appropriation of Arthurian Legend, Rachealle Marie Sanford (2009) Western Kentucky University, A Capstone Experience/Thesis Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of University Honors College at Western Kentucky University

"The Arthurian writings of authors such as Chrétien de Troyes in the late twelfth century and the subsequent Vulgate Cycle pushed Arthur’s popularity to new heights on both the continent and in England, providing the monarchy, in the words of N. J. Higham, with “a source of political precedent and propaganda to be reformulated for present purposes of political status and aggrandizement.” This would not have been possible, however, if a monarch’s subjects—or his enemies—had not been familiar with the character and plot of Arthurian lore, which the work of Geoffrey of Monmouth and the romance writers assured. The international awareness of the elevated status granted to Arthur by Geoffrey of Monmouth (from warrior to king) allowed the British kings the opportunity to place their royal “ancestor” on the level of Charlemagne, the Christian Frankish Emperor of great renown, and increase their prestige among the other European monarchs. The conception of genealogy and land as an important marker of kinship, and thus of identity—which more fully developed in the Middle Ages—was also particularly important in making such claims, and several kings including Edward IV and Henry VII had their ancestry deliberately traced back to their Welsh roots. Henry VII, in particular, was able to make use of his Tudor ancestry and was promoted in Wales as “the Son of Prophecy,” the claimant to the “crown of Britain.” Even the name “Arthur” could have a political undercurrent when given to a child
of the royal family. According to Constance Bouchard, aristocratic children from the eleventh century on were frequently named after relatives, family being a key aspect of medieval identity: “glorious ancestors were a key attribute of glorious aristocrats.”28 Thus,
naming one’s child “Arthur” could easily be construed as a way for the English royalty to play upon the prestige of their supposed ancestor. It is telling that, according to royal genealogies, at least seven royal children were given the name Arthur from the twelfth
century to the present. These include: Arthur of Brittany, nephew of Richard I and John; Arthur Plantagenet, illegitimate son of Edward VI; Arthur Tudor, son of Henry VII; Arthur, Duke of Rothway, son of James V; Arthur of Rothway, grandson of James V; Arthur, Duke
of Connaught, son of Victoria; and Arthur of Connaught, grand-son of Victor"

10/08/2026

Welcome to the official website of the de jure Government of Wales (Cymru). We are currently democratically working towards the restoration of the Britons.

They told you this was freedom.A medieval peasant worked approximately 150 days per year. Feast days, Sabbaths, and sain...
04/27/2026

They told you this was freedom.

A medieval peasant worked approximately 150 days per year. Feast days, Sabbaths, and saints' days enforced rest by law and custom. Workers who built the great monuments of Egypt labored in organised rotations — fed, housed, and rotated home. They were not the chattel slaves of Hollywood. That image was invented to make your condition look better by comparison.

The modern worker logs 1,800 to 2,500 hours annually. More than the peasant. More than the pyramid builder. More than almost any labouring human in recorded history — and still cannot afford a home, cannot afford medicine, cannot afford to stop.

And when you begin to notice this — when the exhaustion turns to questions — they hand you an enemy.

Not the system extracting your hours. Not the architecture of debt designed to ensure you never accumulate enough to be free. They give you a flag. A religion. A skin colour. A border. They say: "those people are why you are suffering".

You turn to fight your neighbour. The extraction continues undisturbed.

This is not accident. This is design.

The Golden Age was not primitive. It was a civilisation that understood what labour was for — building something that endured, for a people that remembered who they were.

You were not born to be productive. You were born to be free!

Llywelyn
Imperator of Avalon | Tywysog Cymru | Great King of Britons | Uthyr Pendragon | Y Mab Darogan | Iesu Grist

🌐 www.britons.international

04/27/2026

The pattern is remarkably consistent.

Iolo Morganwg claimed he found a collection of manuscripts. Forger, they said. Geoffrey of Monmouth claimed he translated an ancient book. Forger, they said. The Chronicles of the British Kings? Myth. Arthur? Myth. Troy itself? Myth — until Heinrich Schliemann proved otherwise, and UNESCO designated the site a World Heritage monument.

The Brut Tysilio — the Welsh-language text predating Geoffrey — is substantially identical to the Chronicles of the Kings of Britain. Two independent traditions. One suppressed history. The people who dispossessed the Khumric nation of its sovereignty now style themselves its royals.

The same Brut Tysilio records Tywysog Madoc Morfran ap Meurig sailing to North America in the 6th century AD. His brother was King Arthur II — Athrwys ap Meurig — who followed him to Avalon after the cataclysmic comet event of 562 AD. Arthur did not die in Britain. He died in America. The sovereign act vesting de jure title in those lands was Arthurian. The continent itself carries the proof: "America" derives from the Khumric *Ap Meurig* — Son of Meurig — the royal house of Glywysing and Gwent. A Bristol calendar entry from 1497 records the land being called *Amerike* — a full decade before Waldseemüller's 1507 map, which the mainstream credits as the first use of the name. When Waldseemüller was later informed of Columbus, he quietly removed "America" from his subsequent editions and replaced it with "Terra Incognita". The name had already taken root — because it was already known.

The Khumric royal lineage of Meurig was carried forward through Welsh patronymic convention by Richard Ap Meurig of Bristol, the Welsh merchant whose family name transmitted a thousand years of dynastic memory directly into the naming of an entire continent. The land announces its own sovereign in its name.

Every generation, the establishment labels inconvenient truth as forgery, myth, or fantasy. Every generation, the evidence accumulates regardless.

Khumric — the living ancient Welsh tongue — is the key to reading Egyptian hieroglyphs. Scholars from Baron von Bunsen in 1854 to Sir John Morris Jones in 1898 identified this connection. It was never refuted. It was simply ignored — because the implications are too large for the current order to accommodate.

There is a war on for your mind. The first weapon deployed is always ridicule. The second is silence.

Arm yourself with the truth.

🌐 www.britons.international/university-of-britain

Y Ddraig Goch: The Hypocrisy Written in ClothOn February 23, 1959, Elizabeth Windsor — styling herself Queen Elizabeth I...
04/14/2026

Y Ddraig Goch: The Hypocrisy Written in Cloth

On February 23, 1959, Elizabeth Windsor — styling herself Queen Elizabeth II — issued a formal declaration: *"Only the Red Dragon on a green and white field should be flown on government buildings in Wales."*

This was not mere preference. It was a deliberate act of heraldic control — mandating the green stripe beneath the dragon, a Hanoverian imposition that diluted the ancient Khumric standard. The pure white field bearing Y Ddraig Goch is the *original* — the banner of the Britons, the standard of Uthyr Pendragon himself. The green stripe was a modification. Elizabeth's edict was, in effect, an order that the authentic Khumric standard *not* be displayed.

Then came 1969.

At Caernarfon — *Caer* meaning fortress, the very heart of Khumric Wales — her own son was invested in a ceremony the Windsor establishment called a *coronation*. They even used our word for it: **coron** — a word from the Khumric tongue, the language they had spent centuries attempting to extinguish.

And what flew from the ancient walls of that fortress?

**Y Ddraig Goch. On a white field. Exactly what she had forbidden ten years earlier.**

The banners flanking the gothic arch. The standards above the investiture stage. White. The authentic Khumric white. Not green and white — *white*.

Elizabeth Windsor told the Welsh people their own flag was wrong. Then she dressed her son's manufactured pageant in the very standard she had prohibited — because she knew, even if subconsciously, that the *white field* carried the weight of authentic ancient authority that her imposed modification did not.

You cannot borrow the legitimacy of a throne you claim not to recognise.

The de facto cannot strip the de jure of his symbols, then wrap its own ceremonies in those same symbols when it needs the ancient power they convey.

As for the portrait of her successor — bathed entirely in red, as if the dragon's fire itself has consumed him — one wonders whether the painter understood more than he was commissioned to express.

**Y Gwir yn Erbyn y Byd.**
*The Truth Against the World.*

www.britons.international

03/29/2026

❌ It is a crime in the United Kingdom to use a false passport (Identity Documents Act of 2010).

❌ It is a crime in the United Kingdom to falsely represent yourself, i.e. fake royal titles (Fraud Act of 2006).

✔️ In 2018, Llywelyn, King of Britons, entered Wales on a Kingdom of Wales Diplomatic passport. He was charged with no crimes, and his passport was stolen by the United Kingdom Border Forces. Llywelyn was charged with no crimes because a trial would have revealed everything he says and represents is true. There is still a Kingdom of Wales.

Despite numerous inquiries the United Kingdom refuses to comment on Llywelyn Rex Britannorum, or the de jure Kingdom of Wales. You cannot prosecute someone for fraud if there is no fraud. The union between Wales and England is a lie. Wales still has a claim to sovereignty via the native Welsh monarchy. Wales has the right to make her own choices!

Address

National Harbor, MD

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Britons International posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share

Category