The post you are reporting:
I just know I'm going to regret this, but here goes:
Britannia was a name used to describe Britain, and Britain most certainly did NOT inherit the Roman Empire.
"Her Acropolis". What is this? The definition from Encylopaedia Britannica (I thought you'd prefer that dictionary) is:
(Greek: "city at the top") Central, defensively oriented district in ancient Greek cities, located on the highest ground and containing the chief municipal and religious buildings".
The word "Greek" appears twice and is a hefty clue as to the origins of this type of construction. There were NO Greek buildings in England at the time of Roman occupation. Ergo "Her Acropolis" doesn't exist. The Temple of Mithras was buiilt in the first century AD, during Roman occupation and it is quite conceivable church design was based on this architectural model. It suggests Chritianity may have taken hold in London first and been exported to Kent and elswhere, using the Mithraic model for building design. I have found no evidence to suggest where the oldest church in Kent is, so, that remains open for debate.
I have found no reference to Britannia being described as "Mother of Beauty". Again, referring to EB we find:
"In the 2nd century Roman Britannia came to be personified as a goddess, armed with a spear and shield and wearing a centurion's helmet". Hmm, not very alluring if you ask me!
As for the waffle about lines and scrolls, no self-respecting architect OR mason would attempt to erect a building in such a manner.
There you go, that is for starters Alexander. I shall now return to my 'lost' status and try to work out what you took before making that posting.