King Arthur

[davewhite04]

This isn't spam, I have actually studied this a bit, and it contains (real/theoretic history), and this guy presents the case for a historical Arthur and the knights of the round table, and Merlin...

What do you think?

 

[exchemist]

This isn't spam, I have actually studied this a bit, and it contains (real/theoretic history), and this guy presents the case for a historical Arthur and the knights of the round table, and Merlin...

What do you think?

Summarise it and we’ll tell you. But I don’t have 47 minutes to waste on a sodding YouTube video.

 

[davewhite04]

Summarise it and we’ll tell you. But I don’t have 47 minutes to waste on a sodding YouTube video.

You really might enjoy that, watch it as if it's true and you might watch it, so matter of fact and sensible historian giving evidence of the real history of Britain. I would like to discuss what he's saying and the way he says it.

Personally, it's plausible to me. Is it to you(you have to watch the video to answer)?

In the meantime I'll try and find a much shorter video, that pacts a punch.

 

[davewhite04]

A bit shorter and better than the above, this is went as a guest over the Atlantic, big thing at the time for an obscure Geordie.

 

[davewhite04]

A bit shorter and better than the above, this is went as a guest over the Atlantic, big thing at the time for an obscure Geordie.

This one doesn't talk about Arthur at all.

Maybe I should create a thread to see which historical/mythological/lengendary actually happened!

 

[exchemist]

You really might enjoy that, watch it as if it's true and you might watch it, so matter of fact and sensible historian giving evidence of the real history of Britain. I would like to discuss what he's saying and the way he says it.

Personally, it's plausible to me. Is it to you(you have to watch the video to answer)?

In the meantime I'll try and find a much shorter video, that pacts a punch.

Better would be if you can summarise the main points in a paragraph for us to read. Videos are a terribly slow and tedious way to impart information.

 

[davewhite04]

Better would be if you can summarise the main points in a paragraph for us to read. Videos are a terribly slow and tedious way to impart information.

It depends if your speakers are working, and how old you are it seems.

Basically Alan is describing how Britain could of been where the trojans fled to, and we(Britain) have a rich history, full of intrigue and mystery, while Oxford and Cambridge conviently add details and remove details from books to write the history our leaders down South want us to think. He also thinks Jesus(with his wife and daughter) came to Britain, and the 12 tribes(I think).

After questioning the existance of Jesus, let's question EVERYTHING!

How many camera men were on the frontlines in ww2? Hundreds going by the ww2 pictures, docs etc. footage.

Question everything.

 

[exchemist]

It depends if your speakers are working, and how old you are it seems.

Basically Alan is describing how Britain could of been where the trojans fled to, and we(Britain) have a rich history, full of intrigue and mystery, while Oxford and Cambridge conviently add details and remove details from books to write the history our leaders down South want us to think. He also thinks Jesus(with his wife and daughter) came to Britain, and the 12 tribes(I think).

After questioning the existance of Jesus, let's question EVERYTHING!

How many camera men were on the frontlines in ww2? Hundreds going by the ww2 pictures, docs etc. footage.

Question everything.

This sounds like mad ballocks. Trojans coming to Britain indeed! What evidence is there of that?

P.S. It is mad ballocks. Just read this, from Wilson’s own website: https://www.black-shuck.co.uk/arthur/conspiracy.html

The guy’s a crank, that’s clear.

 

[Sarkus]

This isn't spam, I have actually studied this a bit, and it contains (real/theoretic history), and this guy presents the case for a historical Arthur and the knights of the round table, and Merlin...
...
What do you think?

What I think is that I'm not wading through 48 minutes, or even 35 minutes for the shorter version to find out what this thread is about.
Please can you summarise, as you've already been asked to do?

What is the video suggesting? What is the evidence for it?
And what are your views on the video?

There are no clear evidences pointing to the reality of a King Arthur. There is some vague mention of an Arthur in early writings, but reliability of such texts are questionable.

So, please can you summarise the videos?

 

[Pinball1970]

This isn't spam, I have actually studied this a bit, and it contains (real/theoretic history), and this guy presents the case for a historical Arthur and the knights of the round table, and Merlin...

What do you think?

Best to go for a decent history textbook on the ancient Celts and Britons. The Romans documented a lot of stuff but the Celts did not but they left a lot of archaeology behind.
It is not my forte but historical criteria can be applied as in the Bible lands claims.
I probably know more about the ancient Israelites than I do about my own ancestry.
As in the Britons generally that is, I can trace back a line to Harold!

 

[davewhite04]

This sounds like mad ballocks. Trojans coming to Britain indeed! What evidence is there of that?

P.S. It is mad ballocks. Just read this, from Wilson’s own website: https://www.black-shuck.co.uk/arthur/conspiracy.html

The guy’s a crank, that’s clear.

He's a character, being excentric is part of his charm. He has wrote books with references, he is the real mcCoy!

I'm sure with a cuppa or whatever favourite beverage you fancy, watching the second one, the shorter video might amuse you Imagine if Arthur and the Knights of the Round table existed in Wales of all places, who would of thunked it?

 

[davewhite04]

What I think is that I'm not wading through 48 minutes, or even 35 minutes for the shorter version to find out what this thread is about.
Please can you summarise, as you've already been asked to do?

What is the video suggesting? What is the evidence for it?
And what are your views on the video?

There are no clear evidences pointing to the reality of a King Arthur. There is some vague mention of an Arthur in early writings, but reliability of such texts are questionable.

So, please can you summarise the videos?

Alan talks a lot about kings in history, how the current royal family are frauds(i think that is one of his claims, something along those lines), how our Saxon history is rubbish, who could argue? Well people can argue but in Camelot's case it's no evidence is not evidence. One of my favourites that. We have weapons with symbols on! same symbols we found in Stratford-upon-Avon.

My favourite history class was with not my favourite teacher but this was the question... "A man is lying down stabbed to the neck, dead, there's a pool of water next to him but no weapon found... how did he die? Think a bit and it's a chuck or spear of ice. That's how detectives think. Talking about a motive...

If Wilson is correct, why do you think the powers that be in this country perverted Britain's early history? What was the motive?

So that is a good question for you, generally, if we found out that we had been lied about for who knows how long, what do you think could be the reasons to rub out previous kings and queens from Britain's history and replace them with imposters?

An educated mind can entertain ideas without necassarily accepting them - James R

 

[davewhite04]

Best to go for a decent history textbook on the ancient Celts and Britons. The Romans documented a lot of stuff but the Celts did not but they left a lot of archaeology behind.
It is not my forte but historical criteria can be applied as in the Bible lands claims.
I probably know more about the ancient Israelites than I do about my own ancestry.
As in the Britons generally that is, I can trace back a line to Harold!

Hi Pinball, hope you're well

I'm mainly interested in Northumberland where I am from this time, 37% Irish 48% Scottish, very little English. That goes back 1500 years. Very few history books on Northumberland, but the ones I've got are excellent, not exactly text books but an entertaining read.

 

[davewhite04]

The historicity of King Arthur has been debated both by academics and popular writers. While there have been many claims that King Arthur was a real historical person, the current consensus among specialists on the period holds him to be a mythological or folkloric figure.
- From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So the existence of King Arthur is serious debate, it might be long in the tooth but some idea that leads to new evidence could set this debate a light again, let's all research King Arthur!

 

[exchemist]

He's a character, being excentric is part of his charm. He has wrote books with references, he is the real mcCoy!

I'm sure with a cuppa or whatever favourite beverage you fancy, watching the second one, the shorter video might amuse you Imagine if Arthur and the Knights of the Round table existed in Wales of all places, who would of thunked it?

You must be fucking joking. I am not watching lengthy YouTube videos from some paranoid crank. Nor should you.

 

[davewhite04]

You must be fucking joking. I am not watching lengthy YouTube videos from a paranoid crank. Nor should you.

I love it when I find characters like Alan along on your journey, makes me smile, can do your head in if you're green as grass, I see your point. But there is an element of truth in everything, I wonder what was true in Alan's work.

 

[exchemist]

I love it when I find characters like Alan along on your journey, makes me smile, can do your head in if you're green as grass, I see your point. But there is an element of truth in everything, I wonder what was true in Alan's work.

This is exactly how YouTube and social media are turning us into a society of credulous morons.

You need to check the credentials of your sources for yourself, now that we can’t any longer rely on editors to do that before material is presented to us. When you encounter something that challenges the accepted version of events you need to ask yourself who is this and can I trust them.

 

[davewhite04]

 

[davewhite04]

This is exactly how YouTube and social media are turning us into a society of credulous morons.

You need to check the credentials of your sources for yourself, now that we can’t any longer rely on editors to do that before material is presented to us. When you encounter something that challenges the accepted version of events you need to ask yourself who is this and can I trust them.

I don't trust the fact that history is written by the winners. I trust genuine people.

 

[Pinball1970]

I don't trust the fact that history is written by the winners. I trust genuine people.

History is not the past, the past is gone and we can never go back there to see what really happened.
Historians try and put together a picture of what most likely happened in the past, based on scripture, secular texts, paintings, engravings, pottery,tools, fossils/bones, soil and mineral analysis and other archaeological techniques.

This is why you need to consult scholarship not YouTube.
Occasionally you may get lucky and stumble on a Flint Dibble (real archaeologist) or a Bart Ehrman (real Biblical Scholar/historian) but it is best to read the general consensus first.