How The Roman Invasion Actually Helped Build Medieval Britain | King Arthur's Britain | Chronicle
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 ส.ค. 2021
- Sheep-farming archaeologist, Francis Pryor, presents a historical series which explores Britain A.D, through the British national character and the ultimate British icon King Arthur. Finding new and previously unexplained evidence, Francis Pryor overturns the idea that Britain reverted to a state of anarchy and disorder after the Romans left in 410 AD. Instead of doom and gloom Francis discovers a continuous culture that assimilated influences from as far a field as the Middle East and Constantinople. Through scrutinising the myth of King Arthur to find out what was really going on when the Romans left, Francis is confronted by evidence that confounds traditional views of the 'Dark Ages'.
Welcome to Chronicle; your home for all things medieval history! With documentaries covering everything from the collapse of the Roman Empire to the beginnings of the Renaissance, from Hastings to Charlemagne, we'll be exploring everything the Middle Ages have to offer.
Subscribe now so you don't miss out!
Chronicle is part of the History Hit Network. To get in touch please email owned-enquiries@littledotstudios.com.
It's like Netflix for history... 📺 Sign up to History Hit, the world's best history documentary service and get 50% off using the code 'CHRONICLE' 👉 bit.ly/3iVCZNl
It's like Netflix for history... 📺 Sign up to History Hit, the world's best history documentary service and get 50% off using the code 'CHRONICLE' 👉 bit.ly/3iVCZNl
There seems to be confusion in that the Belgae and the huge Belgae areas are misrepresented as Atrebates. Atrebates also covered a huge area but were cousins of the Belgae.
My paternal grandmother was descendanded from North Hampshire settled Belgae. Blackmore originally. She told me that they crossed the Rhine to get away from the warring tribes and when those tribes attempted to follow them, the Belgae wouldn't let them land. They only fought if they had to but when they had to they were fierce. They preferred to trade including so many generations working in exchange for land. not work 5 days a week etc. As and when needed. it could be help with building, hunting, clearing forests, whatever and wouldn't even be needed to work for weeks or months. Gradually they spread along to Northern France and crossed the channel to these Isles at the turn of the bronze to Iron ages.
They didn't much like the Atrebates as they were more warring, and tended to raid and take what they wanted instead of trade.
Some 'Roman' villas were actually built by tribes in warm Southern England, but were taken over by Romans when they ruled.
The tribes also did have writing. indenting on thin metal sheets, gold for the most important treatise and marriages. The sheets which were no longer needed were melted for re-use. Metals and especially gold were valuable. The Belgae amongst some others were pragmatic.
My grandmother said that Beaudicea/Boudicca was a troublemaker who had been happy to sell slaves, people stolen from other tribes, to the Romans all the time it suited her but when she and the Romans fell out she rebelled and ten aftermath was that tribes who had been getting along well with the Romans in their own areas became suspect. They weren't ill treated because of her but there was wariness from the Romans that there hadn't been before. This is about how it was explained to me when I was a child. Also that the Belgae and some other tribes found out the Romans would help get rid of the cruel, too powerful druids and that was why they stopped fighting them. Told to me; life was better with the Romans. it was more like a co-operative. They weren't cruel as the druids had been, let people follow their own religions as long as there wasn't human sacrifice and wanted a lot less in taxes than the greedy druids had demanded for themselves. Remember, how people were treated depended on the local Roman leader. The Belgae didn't have MSM. They didn't know until too late how other tribes they intermarried and traded with were being slaughtered. Not allowed Romans throughout the whole time of them being here used collesiums and slaves fighting. I might be mistaken but I think that was more in the North.
Anyway, I hope that is of interest and helpful. In any event please don't confuse the Belgae with the Atrebates. BTW, my grandmother explained to me that the Belgae came in via Chichester and along the coast roundabout there, and their territory went up to near where Littlehampton is. This would include where I am in Bognor Regis. There was another tribe also in these parts at some point and of course boundaries of territories ebbed and flowed, were exchanged, bought, fought and lost or won so when looking at maps of which tribe was where it needs to be remembered that it all changed several times from the Iron age to Roman times, and changed again after that until the truly most cruel y syyc sons, their angels, ju tes then later their nor(th)man cousins invaded a much diminished people whose numbers hadn't recovered after fighting age men and boys left with the Romans. They went to fight for Rome after being lied to it would be a short war and they would return with valuable Roman citizenship. The few people here, mainly women, children and elderly and the few men who had not had anyone train them how to fight with weapons, were no match for the cruellest of invaders who came after the Romans left.
you sure do repost a lot of other people's documentaries, and just change the name of the title.
King Arthur: I am Arthur. King of the Britons.
Peasant 1: King of the who?
King Arthur: King of the Britons.
Peasant 1: I didn't know we had a King. I thought we were an autonomous collective.
Peasant 2: You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship.
@@stevendarkentertainments BE QUIET!! Also..."Strange women, lying in ponds, distributing swords is no basis for a system of government" is the funniest and most brilliant line ever written.
Damned amusing 😀😎😂
You can't expect to wield supreme power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
Bravo 👏👏👏
Peasant 1: I've paid my tithes (10%) tax as my father did & yet you confiscated a portion of my farm & built a castle. King Arthur: Yes that's what I do. Peasant 1: but now castle soldiers are burning,pillaging & raping our young maiden daughters ? King Arthur: Yes it's called civilization & social advancement.
I find it fascinating that a Roman soldier that was stationed along Hadrian's Wall could've also be stationed somewhere in the Middle East after they pulled out of Britain. The array of landscapes and different peoples that those soldiers seen over the course of their military career must've been incredible. Amazing to think that that type of military movement of troops was possible thousands of years ago.
Me too...imagine the nuts and bolts of the logistics, its mind boggling. How dirty and tired and foot sore they must've been
Ships have been around a very long time. And foot sloggers can travel long distances if they don't have to fight at the same time. Just adk the germans and Russians many of whom walked from the ural mountains to berlin.
This is one of the most inviting things about joining such a military. Especially in them times there were long distance travel was more difficult.
@@FabAgainOver50 having walked the whole land route..... Goodness, yes indeed
@@michaelbailey528 The Germans and Russians? Are you referring to WW2 era soldiers? lol, the likelihood that foot soldiers on either side actually walked the entirety of that distance is really pushing it. Comparing the transportation logistics and infrastructure of civilizations almost 1500 years apart is kind of rationally dishonest lol. Transporting tens of thousands of soldiers 1500 years+ ago over 2000+ miles at any given time is an incomprehensible logistical nightmare in those times mainly due to provisions and water. Vast majority of troops in WW2 on every side just hopped onto passing tanks or vehicles to get to where they were going, they didn't just walk everywhere. If they walked everywhere they would have been completely unfit for battle by the time they arrived anywhere and would be completely wasting the technology at their disposal lol.
My understanding of the "dark age" has always been that it is because the historical record goes dark. Not because it was supposedly savage and barbaric. I do enjoy that this series puts a few pinholes of light in it.
"a few pinholes" seems to describe your education entirely
Very classy bk
The simple fact little is known and there are lots of myths shows it was truly a dark age in terms of historical records. You are correct
Saying it was not dark ages and people and historians have been wrong about it, and new discoveries prove it, actually shows it was INDEED dark ages in terms of historical records
I always enjoyed seeing Francis Pryor on Time Team, I'm very happy to see this series lead by him, very informative and well done.
even seeing Guy again and his knowledge of roman things the gang of time team lingers well mates
Agreed, i wish phil would do something similar. I love his personality.
Time team was good... They could turn the most boring thing into an exciting story
Absolutely fascinating. So refreshing to watch serious considerations of history. .
I just watched you unable to end a sentence with a period. So wow for all of us!
4:08 "..not to mess with the might of Rome." ...and a jet flies by?? What?
I know...very peculiar editing. ??? Wtf!
Perhaps it was a reminder towards the "New Rome", whose ancient past is filled with imagery and references to "bombs, rockets" and other weapons of war (well, ancient for THEM anyway!)
Thought subtle. Ha.
King Arthur I was a 4th century king who led the army of his father Macsen Wledig (Magnus Maximus) into Gaul and killed Galatian. The romans called him Andragathius. King Arthur II, was his 6th century descendant, King of Glamorgan with powerbase at Caer Melot. Chosen by the other kings to be their Dux Bellorum in the fight against saxons.
He also fought Modred who tried to usurp whilst Arthur was over in Brittany.
Monmouth conflated the exploits of both into 1 person and more..
They were Britons and it's in the records.
Sword in the stone refers to the technology of smelting iron from rock.
Britain was devastated by a Comet in 562AD after which nothing grew or lived, hence the dark ages term.
It was this devastation that ultimately allowed the Saxons to get a proper foothold.
A comet! I read through all of this and got to Britain was devastated by a comet in 562 AD 😂
Please send me a link.
@@dave9401 Yes indeed.
Mentioned in the Brut Tysillo and Gregory of Tours, a french writer also recorded it. Gildas also I believe.
You can also check out the Ravenna mosaics 537 AD
th-cam.com/video/t4WBALFPmw4/w-d-xo.html
and more info here.. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_weather_events_of_535%E2%80%93536
They have a lot of modern tree data confirming now on top of examples of fuse melted rock etc.
It didn't just affect large part of Britain for roughly 10 years but effects were widespread.
Upper South America seems to have been hit hard too by the main path of it which might explain why some ancient civilisations in that region seemingly just disappeared.
Bear in mind the difference in Gnostic and Julian calendar is 33 years.
@@simonpayne8252 you haven't posted a single bit of credible information from a reliable source. There's no evidence of this in ice or tree records... Why? We have trees that are over 2000 years old in Britain which would easily prove this theory, why is there no evidence of a comet strike?
@@dave9401
Ah.. no stone shall fall from heaven!!
Until 1803 of course.. when the meteor shower in Normandy, France actually forced the Church to reluctantly admit it can and does happen.
I encourage you to do some research and draw you own conclusions
@@simonpayne8252 Halley’s Comet is clearly shown on the Bayeux Tapestry, an artwork created by nuns in the 11th century! Are you serious?
It's worth searching Bersted Man, found near to where I live. From the turn of the Bronze and Iron ages. No doubt not the only one but the only one declared found. Remember that when areas are being 'developed' it is mostly heavy digging vehicles used and the workmen might not notice skeletons and a small number of artifacts that aren't so large, and if they do notice then it is probably too late to put them together as all is smashed. Plus of course workmen would lose work, their much needed wages, if a building site were closed for a long time, maybe permanently, as sites of historical interest or scientific interest. The bosses of the small to medium building companies would lose so much money they might go bust. In addition officials of local authorities, Councils, are likely to be more concerned with meeting quotas and deadlines than even the most interesting and precious remains and artifacts. We will never know how many others such as Bersted Man have ended up under roadways, train tracks, buildings and under reservoirs etc. We can only be sure that there were others as magnificent as he and our ancestors weren't the primitive idiots we were and still often told they were. Far from it.
I'm pretty sure anyone they dig up would be more literate in death than whatever the absolute f you just typed here.
There's got to be a connection between the myth of Arthur and Jesus. 12 knights, illegitimate son, will return, Devine king etc
Well wales was already christianized by then so most likely it blended pagan and christian elements
There's got to be a connection between 12 and a dozen. Wow. I'm a moron like you. Gosh golly. I have an internet connection.
Fantastic doc. Also found facejacker's inspiration for Brian badundy.
The concept of a "Dark Age" originated in the 1330s with the Italian scholar Petrarch, who regarded the post-Roman centuries as "dark" compared to the "light" of classical antiquity. Wikipedia
I can see a poor young warrior diving into a lake to retrieve a great sword 🗡-- then lying and saying a goddess gave it to him so the villagers didn't kill him.
Write that novel, please!
Binge watching this channel! Excellent videos
This was so interesting
Good stuff ,cheers.
The island needs to be reforested
Truer words have never been spoken. I'd start with Anglesey 👍
Years ago I run a charity advocating that very point, after endless abuse I packed in 😕
@@jensstahlschmidt2183 the country will be on your side now.
The climate alarmists will mock you for posting this. They want power down authoritarian govt ie corporatism/fascistic that is opposed to our Anglo Saxon culture of Liberty both on the Island and in the US.
@@masterdrewanthony you would, but you'd have to get rid of the airport first
Sheep farming archeologist... Cool!
I think Christianity and the themes therein matured some of those Concepts and King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table echoed the high sentiments and themes found in the gospel and Bible in general. Things like Purity, honor and loyalty. I think to fully get it you must be Christian and have a relationship with the Lord it's a shame that this generation has slipped so far mentally and spiritually. The light of the word spread throughout the world making it free in heart and spirit, how important God was two ancient people such as these.
Yeah spreading the light. Convert or die. I’d rather die than join a religion that believes a Jewish carpenter was the son of G*d. More people have dies in that guys name than probably any disease or famine. Yeah I’ll pass.
@ Kaptain Kaos: grammar corrections: not “have dies”, instead past tense is “have died”. Whether you pass or not, everyone dies. Life = death.
CHIVALRY. yes. good to see a man advocating it. Noblesse Oblige' .
go abuse your pillow
So if 1066 was the last invasion, what do we call Steven of Blois's invasion during the mid to late 12th century? Or What do we call the invasion of the young Henry Tudor? Ending the war of the roses. I admit that I am not an expert, but an enthusiast. However, I must be missing something. Here
1066 was complete superimpostition of one foreign people with a different language, over the top of the existing lords AND PEOPLE of the land. the Saxon PEOPLE really lost out big time. the others were just changes of regime, not wholesale invasions and overall re-subjugation of all the people. But the Normans created a whole new class of overlords, which is most of the British Aristocracy today, and lowered the class of all Anglo Saxons into commoners and serfs, for the most part. .
You also forgot louis of France and his invasion
Love Francis on Time Team. Glad to see him in other things! Such a wealth of passion and knowledge.
7:35 "...until somebody nicked the sword." :(
In every myth, there's a bit of truth.
Ladies & Gentlemen, presenting the enlightenment formerly known as "The Dark Ages!"
Interesting ,Max Adam's books on the dark ages are worth a look ,especially the King in the North about Saint /King Oswald who Tolkein based Aragorn on..
Is your keyboard or brain broken?
Haven’t been invaded since 1066? Hmmm. 1688 - Orange acquires Britain with funding from Suasso.
what are you talking about? that was just royals. Not an invasion, nothing at all like 1066.
400- 500 years! Watch these numbers when studying how long empires stay at the top.
what, you mean Rome? LOL Rome lasted 1000 years, including the Republic, and then another 1000 if you count the Eastern Roman Empire. And almost another 1000 if you count the Holy Roman Empire ( what about 800 or so?).
Andrew... what human would you advise to "watch" the course of 400-500 years? Do you have dopish ideas about america after 250-300? Not long enough for this moronic youtube comment.
So what is whatever you just typed supposed to mean? Can you scrape your brain along the coals long enough to type a response?
In the bronze age it was common sense to hide their weapons in the nearest river. Displaying the Weapons would be an invitation to fight.
I just love how all these videos have cool ass questions as headlines that im like dang that seems interesting… then its just the same old video that dumps the same dam facts youve heard a 1000 times and then 60 seconds of could this have led to so and so question… then no answer
yeahthis is a video from a different producer that they just copied and put out recently.
Kiritsugu Emiya will summon Artoria back, and all will be well, or so it seemed.
sure thing weeb
I think most countries histories have been misunderstood or completely lied about.
Of course.
That's why archaeologists are so important. Match historical finds with the records. Helps figure out the truth
“history is written by the winners”.
If one thinks about it coming, seeing and conquering does not necessarily mean they conquered by military force, but maybe all the Roman invaders had to do was simply arrive with all their splendor. They won over or conquered the hearts of the Brits. Actually the Celts on the mainland Continent had long history of trading with the Romans. It could well be as simple as a sympathetic Brit tribe inviting the Romans into Great Britain.
LOL. READ history. the one that Romans and others wrote back at the time.Why do you guys always make up a phoney reality.
You have an extended history of trading with dementia. Everything you've just said is so humiliatingly without value that I hope we never talk again.
If Arthur didn't return during WWII, it means that either he isn't real, or shite's gonna get worse!
pip pip blimey you old time cartoon. go bellow the chips up your missus.
I like the idea that King Arthur's Court was a real thing
Just realized Arthur and Balder have similar mythical trajectories. @9:47
so the king arthur actually spoke Latin?
Probably had Roman lineage.
Was excited to see this but straight away found that I've seen it three thousand times already. boo.
Paused at the mention of Kng Arthur,who wll return to save england at its greatest peril. I personally thnk that he did return,, We knew him then as Winston
Churchill.
Loved the swan shaking the water from his feathers - as if he was saying no to the idea that Arthur was slaughtered at Slaughter Bridge. Clever photography ☺️
Loved the Mary typing the nonsense into TH-cam. As if she was saying no to the idea of art. Clever misrepresentation of the most basic intellect.
Hate to say it, but Arthur failed. He didn't come back when they needed him. Arthur came from two different stories after the Romans left. And from ancient stories that give hints of how life was before the Romans.
Arthur hasn't come back YET. When he is truly needed he will appear
@@Elleoaqua There simply was no Arthur. Two different generals left in England when Rome left could have been the model, but no round table, and no Arthur. Sorry.
The legend captures the yearning (of order restored) from "the return of the King"... Jonathan Pageau discusses this on his Symbolic World YT channel. As it is, it serves purpose for our cultural memory.
He wasn't a real person, you intellectual menstruation.
ARTHUR was KIng of Glamorgan South Wales , he is buried at Cae Caradog south east Wales .
was there more than one arthur? do you or anyone have proof?
@@theCosmicQueen ALAN WILSON and BARAM BLACKET have written many books on this issue . this is where i would go for full details on ARTHUR. there were 2 KING ARTHURS , 200 years apart and ARTHUR 2 is a direct decendant of ARTHUR first . there are also youtube videos of ALAN talking about this issue . hope this helps all the best
sword in the stone, a blacksmith makes one from a rock called iron ore......... to most it was real magic to behold............ so the story was created to match....... the truth hidden in a fable
Translation: Britain was uncivilizable and never assimilated into the culture or civilization of Ancient Rome, so when the legions departed, it quickly reverted to the barbarian cultural norms of the past.
which isn't all that bad.
480p..... how retro....
They water worship is very close to old Norse worship. They went to streams and bathed and worship Odin and left items to appease the Gods. The Jutes, Angles and Saxons did the same. As well as the northern Slavs.
those are all germanic nordic peoples.
Looks like Britain AD rebranded. Still excellant, though.
Your ancestors? Hard to believe which gaggle of inhabitants your talking about. Briton/Welsh, Angelo Saxon, Celtic, Viking, Roman, Norman, Pict....?
all of them probably.
Those people the Roman's called Barbarians and Savages, Went on to develope Rockets and Explore Outer Space.
Germanikolaas the Chinese were the first to developed rocket technology and used it in warfare, also the cannon, rudder , compass etc, ect
@@aevans-jl9ym I am just saying that the Roman's use to call the surrounding Germanic and Celtic/Gaelic tribes Barbarians. Yet the Civilized Roman Empire collapsed and the so called Barbarians went to go on advancing culture especially technology, something so called Barbarians couldn't.
@@aevans-jl9ym invent and develope have two separate meanings, but thanks for ringing in. Those barbarians INVENTED a good seventy percent of modern technology. Have a nice day.
@@germanikolaas yes they called them savages because they WERE savages untill at some point in history they stopped being so, in part also because they made the effort to learn from the romans, just like the romans learned from the Greeks
@Nephalim Power doubt. Be so kind as to give some examples of such advancements.
Many Roman building and road and swimming bats are still up today.
Baths
My favorite part is when he discovers Christianity survived in England despite Romes exodus. The more pure Christian church inmo..
Really, why? Christianity did a lot of damage to the cultures and peoples of the Britain and Ireland.
@@oldmanfromscenetwentyfour8164 because it adheres to science. Let us reason with each other.~Paul. Stop being a Cultural Marxist, it's all doom and envy, a death cult.
@Nephalim Power save your cultural Marxist envy for idiots.
And of course everyone who doesn’t agree with you is lost in ‘Cultural Marxism’, extreme right wing BS
@@willbe5994 No, it's what we Christians call the general rule vs the exception to the rule. It's found in Proverbs. Now he could be some druid or Norse religion, but that is the excpetion, the general rule with that comment is Cultural Marxist use. Extreme right wing is nothing more the worship of Liberty, ie Civil Rights. James 1:25 I take no umbrage from your comment. Whatever damage that happen to the old cultures can't be blamed on Christ. The old norse Gods of wood were not as strong as the iron God of Christ. That's what the Norse said when they converted to Christianity. It's much stronger/powerful ethics.
great documentary. I feel like there is some repeat from another similar documentary.
k?
The same can be said for the British empire and how they built civilisation across the face of the globe
Not like the Romans...
a lot of that was also to establish christianity and the inherent benefits to society. because God wants that. the Brits brought it. In large part.
🌹
This guy is the British version of we wuz kangs n sheit
But we wuz kangs
I swang Excalibur into the river and well saw the hand of the lady of the river caught it in her hand and hid it in the wombs of the river. Arthur was my grand father, 🧿🧿🎯🎯🎖🎖🥇🥇🌹🌹
It should be noted that among the Roman legions Christianity had made enormous inroads prior to Constantine .
Damn shame Pryor refuses to consider the work of Alan Wilson & Baram Blackett when it comes to King Arthur.
Pryor no more has to consider those books than the Harry Potter ones.
@@sarahmillard6401 Spoken like someone who has never read them or reviewed their research.
@@oldmanfromscenetwentyfour8164 I don’t do pseudohistory mate. I have, however, read a couple of reviews of their self-published “research” and the lack of historical methodology used by this pair of chancers, and that was enough to convince me to not waste my time on this drivel.
@@sarahmillard6401 You based your opinion and validity of their work on the opinions of others ... so much for an open mind. We're done here. Bye
@@oldmanfromscenetwentyfour8164 I trust the opinions of real historians more than that of a convicted art thief who can’t even use his real name for his vanity publishing project. PS I have a degree in history, a post grad diploma and I was taught by Nick Higham who features in this documentary. Bye!
I guess Arthur fell asleep during World War II??
No - we won .
In a land far beyond our reach there was another land and so as far as you could see was happyness amongst the people As far as we may see. Concealed history 🦉
This sounds good but why no referencing to written documents of which there should be many. Seems odd to speculate so much, I guess to give credence to keep their opinion alive instead of using original letters, writings, documents.
Seems like the same thing happened in Afghanistan. The American invasion greatly modernized the army after the Afghans took their equipment and expelled them from the country.
wow,are you an ignoramus! the usa was not expelled at all. We WITHDREW by popular demand of the American people, because a 20 year presence there and the cost of it was not popular.. The USA did not invade Afghanistan but was brought in by the request of the government , by an agreement. It was only the TALIBAN which did not like it. as the USA was an ally of the Afghan government , coming to train the Afghans how to be a modern army to fight them. The Taliban was NOT the government! The afghans hated the Taliban because they are so oppressive. we left behind our equipment, dipshhht. They did not TAKE it. Stupid Biden failed to remove it like he should have, BEFORE THE WITHDRAWAL.
Didn’t any Romans stay behind in England, Scotland, and Wales.
I think the consensus is yes, but in very small, almost insignificant numbers
Many Roman soldiers intermarried with the locals and remained after their retirement
Funny. In this video he says myths are not lies, but in a previous video he calls The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle a lie.
Seems like only his opinion and theories matter! 😡🤬👎🏼👎🏼👎🏼👎🏼👎🏼
Yeah, I have his Britain AD book "debunking" the Anglo-Saxon invasions, based purely on archaeology, & having now read about the MASSES of literary, linguistic & DNA proof for them in Jean Manco's book The Origins of the Anglo-Saxons... yeah nah. Not convinced. And if he says the A-S Chronicle is a LIE... :o Yep, not worth watching further.
Veni Vedi Vici
I mean , it's one thing to rectify public myths but saying that it's complete rubbish is an extreme claim. Urbanization, literacy and government were drastically reduced.....
LOL to a lot of people, that's a big plus. the little people have their day then. Urban centers can be real pits of hell. And big government overlording evryone to a high degree, is usually a shame as well. i wouldn't assume literacy was so reduced/ how do we know if people could read or not? Books and paper were very expensive. Monks could not only read and write but they were expert calligraphers. They acted as scribes as well.
@@theCosmicQueen how can we know that people could read or not... is that a real question? Antiquity and middle age farmers are illiterate for 2 reasons, there's no schools and the material to write is very hard to obtain and super expensive ( like nobility hard to obtain ).... was that a real question???? And btw, no urbanization = no progress so that little people having their day thing you said is a net negative for everyone.
Civilization is relative to dominance.
With a picture of a Greek or Trojan soldier as an appetizer. That is surely not Roman nor British.
I can't watch based on that. What facts can I expect from such a production?????
Pedants are sticklers for truth. Ie FACTS.
They couldn't find a picture of a Roman soldier??.
Ever heard “don’t judge a book by its cover?”
Also that isn’t a Greek or Trojan soldier. It is the Roman god Mars who is often depicted nude with a helmet, shield, and spear.
the romans originally came from Greece or Troy. so they of course had a similar culture and similar helmets at times.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You could not be more silly.
I love how this 'historian' ('prehistorian' to be exact - not a job title I'm familiar with, or would think most people would be familiar with; why the prefix? It seems that the job is functionally no different from that of a regular historian, if you focus on an era of the past then that is the study of history regardless of the period, so your ideas should stand shoulder to shoulder with those of your colleagues - but I digress) is entirely befuddled by the mixing of Christian and Pagan symbolism, as if it's a great mystery of some kind. We have known for aeons that successful empires and societies, are not one invading force's complete takeover and subjugation of another, but the intermingling and 'live and let live' attitude of the conquerors towards the invaded; this is the reason for the interspersing of the iconography of both cultures in modes of art... The first 'great emperor', the 'king of kings' Cyrus the Great of Persia was known for this and closely associated with allowing the peoples he conquered to keep their native customs and practices and even religions, as long as they recognised his overall rule and would supply him with either tribute or soldiers in times of war; essentially they became vassal states or satrapys to give them their specific name in Achaemenid Persia. Alexander's entire pretext for his bankrupting of the state to fund his giant invasion into Persia was to free the Greek city states under Persian rule... when he got there he discovered they were actually quite content with Persian rule, so much so that they told him to leave; purportedly they may have even paid him to. He refused of course and went on his now legendary killing spree bringing war to the citizens of hitherto peaceful lands spanning thousands of miles (Did Alexander's empire last very long after his death by the way?) Cyrus was also known as a 'messiah' in his day; many people were called messiahs based on their exploits and decisions, in his case he freed the Jewish population from slavery and indentured servitude in Babylon, allowing them to return to Jerusalem at which point they built the second temple. To this day he is considered a great liberator among many peoples, including the Jews. The Biblical story also has further parallels in history (one is the Arthurian legend, for instance) to those that can see them based on their level of learning. Gilgamesh predates Noah and the flood of the Bible by thousands of years; there are recurring thematic motifs across time and cultures which may make them more relatable and understandable to those reading them. Credit to him for finding examples of the blending of deep-rooted traditional belief system imagery alongside the new and exotically intriguing ideas of a conquering foreign empire, but this is hardly an isolated case.
'In 380... the emperor establishes edicts against heresies' and wait a second when did Rome fall apart again? Oh yes of course, just a few decades later. What a coincidence...
Camelot is not in England.
Half the English language is Latin based. Obviously, the Romans had a lasting effect. The Catholic Church and the Vatican stayed on well into the Protestant Reformation. The Normans from France (originally from the Nordic countries) ruled over Britain for Centuries.
Nope. English is a Germanic language, with some later input from Old Norse and Latin amongst others, but the Latin influence is from Old French rather than the Romans. The Anglo-Saxon invasions brought the introduced Latin language to an end.
Sure didn't help the English food any...
Very well intentioned but an overbearing soundtrack spoils it...
Oh so you don't like the facts if the music doesn't please your simian brain. Ok grandpa.
I tend to believe King Arthur and Jesus Christ are one and the same
Info-sparse.
Then the Americans came along and said it's all lies because.... There wasn't a history before America 👻🇬🇧
so from what i have researched, King Arthur if he even was a real person, would have not been a king of the British isle, he was the king of the Britons, which as most people who bother to look would know, was in north western France. long before the Britons moved into what we now call the British Isles. he would predate the medieval times by a few hundred years actually. why does everyone act like he was a king in medieval times I do not know, we have extensive records of who were kings during medieval times and Arthur is not listed as a king, but what we dont have is records of who was king of the Britons, from Britony during the times of 1ad-300ad.
wrong...He was probably Welch or an Amalgam of Welch warriors. If he was Breton then the enemy would have been the Franks not the Saxons. Also why then the focus on British sites not mainland Europe? Why are there so many more Arthur references in landscape names in the UK than Europe/France/Breton? Certainly there would have been British refugees following the Romans as they left and colonized in Brittany however. This could easily explain the movement of the stories to the mainland.
I like your take on it. There’s a great lecture series on audible by Dr. Dorsey Armstrong about King Arthur. She covers both the “real” man and the one from literature and gives great insight into the subject. She believes he was from Cornwall and probably wasn’t a “king” at all, but a Lord of some kind. Definitely check it out if you can.
Just one problem with your theory . The Britons did not move into the British Isles from 'France' they went the Other Way, into what was then Armorica. It became associated with Britain after people fled there to avoid the Saxons. (They also went to what was to become Normandy, which was also known then as Britanny.Which is kind of ironic) It was not Brittany before , it was Armorica. Keep researching! Also No one does think he was Medieval.That was invented by Christian de Troyes in the 12th century.Then the Victorians got at it and Voila! Hollywood Camelot!
Singinginthedark, when Britain was invaded by the Germanic hordes many Britons fled their ancient homeland and resettled in France hence the presence of Bretons in France
The best Kings go unrecognized. The Kings in the record logs are actually just figureheads; that's why the king always dies in the movie. The real kings are out of the limelight, pulling the strings of the center stage, puppet kings; many of whom were actually queens in a king's facade. The eyes never lie.
ngl this video was exceedingly grasping at straws to explain things lmfao. They basically made a video geared towards proving their own self fulfilling prophecy, like yeah man i'm sure people just walked over to some water and threw in their treasured family heirloom sword that costs as much as the rest of their property combined. Like do you realize how valuable a sword was in those times? That would be like us today driving our car off a bridge into the water for the sake of tradition lmfao...It's so obvious those weapons and tools were in those locations due to battle's that were funneled into the narrow causeways as a strategic means of defending more efficiently.
you know nothing. those people SACRIFICED to their gods for a win in battle, or some big thing.
The thing about Arthur is it's so bloody boring, impossible,and stupid....it's just terrible.
King Arthur is that you Jesus?
We were invaded in 1689
Sounds like a parody of Brexit! Welcome to 400 years of dark ages!!
Our long British identity is being destroyed by immigration from countries today that do not fit our civilisation whatsoever. It makes me sad and angry in equal measure!
Get a grip
@@oioimazz9294 SHUSH.
Americans don't blame you. at least, not us old family americans.
Pre-historian....another name for a fake historian.
clearly this is a continuation of those strange fantasies that they described in "Is The Anglo-Saxon Invasion Of England A Myth?"
1:44 The Germanic tribes were not exactly a superior civilization compared to the Brythonic tribes but were more united and stubborn and therefore they won. Among the Germanic tribes of the times of migrations of peoples fought everone from young to old but among the Britons, it was mostly nobility fought. Since, as an effect of their tribalism, they had constant reinforcements in manpower and the result - the Germanic won. Of course, I won’t compare the West Germanic tribes with the Romans, it’s just ridiculous and incomparable
1:49 king arthur is a late fairy tale, but the people living at that time are quite real
1:58 it is not clear what kind of culture he means, if English, then it did not exist before the invasion of the Germanic tribes into Britain, if Roman, then it partially left with the Romans and was partially adopted by the inhabitants of the island. If the cultures of the peoples of the British Isles, then they are partly suppressed by the Germanic and partly assimilated by them. In one way or another, all 3 of these cultures exist in our time, albeit in a modified form after so many years.
And the Celts were not easily overwhelmed; the struggle with them went on first for tens and then for hundreds of years. Partially their descendants in the form of Scots, Welsh and others still exist. Separate peoples like the Picts, on the contrary, are completely assimilated. Later Britain even had Scottish kings.
2:04 after the Roman invaded ? it's a completely different time. The mythical king Arthur fought off the Saxon invasions (Battle of Katraet).
There were two Roman invasions, the first in the time of Caesar. two military campaigns conducted by the Roman general Gaius Julius Caesar in 55 and 54 BC. e. The first invasion, which took place at the end of the summer, was conceived either as a full-fledged invasion (in this case it turned out to be unsuccessful - the Romans captured a bridgehead in the Kent area, but nothing more) or as a reconnaissance expedition. The second invasion was more successful: the Romans made an alliance with one of the leaders of the Britons, Mandubracius, and together with him defeated his rival Cassivelaun, who led the fight against the Roman invaders; although no territories were conquered and held by Rome, an alliance was made with the Trinovantes, who would later become allies of the Romans during the conquest of Britain, and some East Anglia tribes promised to pay tribute to the Romans. In general, he came victorious in several battles, took hostage members of the families of local leaders, took gold and went back to Gaul.
The second Roman invasion was during the time of the emperor Claudius / In 43, four Roman legions under the command of the consul Aulus Plautius landed in Britain. The conquest of Britain by the Romans dragged on for 40 years. A number of lands, such as, for example, Dorset, did not want to submit for a long time. In addition, uprisings often broke out in the occupied territories. Britain remained part of the Roman Empire for several centuries. In the IV century, the weakening of the empire began. In 395, it split into two parts - the Western and Eastern Roman Empires. The power of the Romans on the outskirts became more and more unstable, and in 407 they were forced to leave the island.
briefly it's like this
2:44 for this you need a time machine and a translator from ancient languages and not archeology 🤣How can you tell something from the point of view of long-dead people? 🤨🤔
You can only explain your point of view on them and nothing more, but yes based on modern archeology, genetics, traceology, etc.
3:03 his ancestors are Celts Britons? ok
3:30 Nothing surprising in Britain found settlements of the Bronze and Iron Ages. The people of La Tène culture (the Celtic archaeological culture of the Iron Age V- I century BC) were skilled in creating fortifications 😎
4:31 actually no, Britain as a Roman province or Celtic Britain before it has very little in common with modern Britain, and even less in common with the mentality of its people
4:40 the dark ages is a conventional name for the times after the collapse of the Roman Empire and they are named so by those who experienced, if I may say so, Roman-philia. Of course, nothing special happened, the "barbarians" defeated the Romans and began to develop themselves. The "Dark Ages" will be later than the capture of Britain by the Romans, or I don't understand something, or he jumps through different periods. He was just talking about the Roman invasion of Britain which took place long before the Dark Ages. 🤔
5:18 no one really denies that the Celts were strong but the Romans had statehood and were at a different level of development 🧐
5:22 Are these archaeologists crazy or something ? Or is this a rhetorical statement ? Camelot does not exist because King Arthur is a fairy tale 😂
5:58 what connection 😵💫🤦♂
6:06 WHAT ??? "could arthur be clue what happened in britain AD" WHAT ??? 👨🍳😵🤣
6:10 it is generally accepted that the story of King Arthur is fiction even if it has some historical details about the Celtic society of that time or something like that. How seriously can you look for something that does not exist ? 😳
6:32 King Arthur's round table was probably written off from the story of Charlemagne fictional story.
The oldest stories about King Arthur do not call Camelot by this name. Camelot is first mentioned in the novel Lancelot by Chrétien de Troyes. Given de Troyes' well-known penchant for creating new fictional stories and characters (for example, the mention of a love affair between Lancelot and Queen Guinevere), the name "Camelot" can also be completely fictional. According to legend, Camelot ruled Britain, Ireland and Brittany (part of modern France) before the Saxon conquest. In Camelot, Arthur created a brilliant court that attracted the most famous knights of Europe, who became the Knights of the Round Table. Camelot was the starting point for the search for the Holy Grail. Theoretically possible location could be ancient Camulodunum. The plot of the Arthurian legend first appears in the 12th century in the pseudo-historical chronicle of Geoffrey of Monmouth, "The History of the Kings of Britain".
6:59 if he is an archaeologist, then what he unearthed, what finds he made and what he wrote. He must have articles in some scientific journal 🤔
7:53 Arthur will come in case of danger to protect his Celtic kingdom from the ancestors of the modern English Saxons, the Angles in that story as far as I remember. 🤣
8:27 it is a fairy tale - all facts against it