Was This The Castle Of The Legendary King Arthur? | Extreme Archaeology | Absolute History 

Still can't figure why alice was'nt host of this series.

@@s1nb4d59 I'm glad she's doing digging for Britain, much more interesting than this host...

I totally agree, his remarks were very disrespectful and unprofessional. It was a lot of work to walk that geophysical sensor across that landscape, and then to have this fellow demean that person was out of line.

I suspect there was a prior argument and a touch of elitism at play. *sigh*

I get your feelings, I really do, but I look at Mark and I see my field coordinator. This is the person in academic circles who "holds the purse", so to say. They have to dispose of the department's research funding, and it is the job of the academics in the department to convince the field coordinator that, yes, their pet project is worth the money and will pay up in scientific findings. I am not an archaeologist myself, but this is how things generally work in university research labs across the board (unless, of course, you have your own research grant, in which case you deal straight with your university bureaucracy... and that is sometimes worse). Sure - Mark is not an actual field coordinator, but he is still (on camera, at least) responsible for managing the show's resources, run-time, and final outcome in the field. So he has to be this sort of annoying asshat! It is his role to ask the nasty questions, shut down less thought-through ideas, and prioritise where the time and effort is spent. There is no nice way to reject an excited academic. It's a bit like kicking a playful puppy. You will always look like a dickhead.

@@saveusmilkboy So basically a producer, without which there is no show. And he knows it.

Yeah, Mark is an ignorant and arrogant git.

​@@saveusmilkboy You sound like this was her idea for a project though and she applied for funding or something like that. I would guess it's the other way around and the producer/s wanted a geologist to confirm if there are buildings at that spot. And if that's the case his interaction with her was very disrespectful and his stance towards her work extremely ignorant. At around minute 23:30 my jaw dropped to the floor and I thought I misheard (I'm no native speaker though so there is that). But isn't the premise that the geologist is there to confirm if at that spot were buildings or not and she is exactly doing that? After him remarking that she wastes time she tries to explain to him that the instruments work and even if she confirms that there were no buildings she is delivering the desired data... and he just repeats that her work is worthless if she doesn't identify an area for the trench. Undesired data is not worthless and she seemed stunned by his stupidity and disrespect.

And btw it seems obvious that Charles was like the head advisor for the show and I would bet he was the main input concerning the single projects and what would be needed for them...

Hooooman booooooones my god all their accents are unbearable….. lol dude weights like 250 yah you’re a climber lol 😂

No, he's a volcanologist- Who doesn't work as a presenter, to me. Dramatising this is not good. Time Team's way of investigation was nicer and more inclusive than confrontational like this. The cultural mix here doesn't seem to work that well.

well ...Tony from Time team is an actor. not that i like that mark-guy...but what he is has nothing to do if he can or can not host a show like these just because he isn't a archaeologist. the difference is just that Tony from Time Team knows what his job is

I think this series is from 2004.. the Oakley sunglasses tipped me off lol! That might explain it!

I think he's the guy who does all the rope work.. climbing ropes, zip lining etc. Basically he has everyone's life in his hands. Would have been nice if they introduced him, they can't do this work without him!

Part of the delivery team and mostly helps with rope work . Why do you have so much respect for a guy you know nothing about ?

@@SabbaticusRex Well, I tend to give respect to people by default, letting them lose it if they behave badly, rather than making them win it by behaving well. But in this guy's case, he just gave me the sense of a competent, calm worker. I like those a lot. Wanted to know more.

The 'Roman' buildings aren't roman either, same with high gothic buildings.

Historians love Rome and don't like to admit they destroyed more than they created.We still live in the shadow of the Roman empire.

He says mean things and asks these lovely ladies to do things he's too scared to do, duh 😂

Next they will vote an archaeologist off each week and film the girls pulling each others' hair lol

Well .. they are Liberals and SJW's producing all this dribble .......... Cant we get something better like TIME TEAM ? Without the prescribed b.s, arrogant Host and someone with some actual Enthusiasm for Archaeology would be really nice .. Not an arrogant prissy Geologist ...they can call him in as a consultant if they need it . Make Archaeology Great Again !

@@fetus2280 liberal has zero to do with it. Nice stretch though

I don't see a problem with the story telling

@@fetus2280 woke archaeology you might say.

We were more advanced in ancient times, not less. Pyramids and surrounding sites also have all kinds of bore holes that would require diamond drills.

We do know that drills existed before Christ that could dig into stone. Egypt is a good example.

Too bad Mark literally calls them worthless! He needs to go!

boring video

King Arthur has become Nothing but Click Bait

drilling in rock is simple if laborious, you get a dowl coat one flat end with resin glue coat that with hard rock powder and rotate the dowl with a bow or by hand until you get what you need.

peter forden spoken like someone who has never had to drill a hole in a rock without using power.

@@jpmcpinning4255 I've done it myself, its a known stoneage technique, did I not say its laborious? you sound like a yank , who only knows power tools and has never studied the stoneworking techniques of the ancients, however the drill holes do look like they're made with 'modern' techniques (ie 1800's to today!)

by the way drilling the old way took weeks per hole.....sometimes months.......it was'nt the McDonalds era.

peter forden correct, they look like todays holes, but done in antiquity. Thats the point.....And if you have done it, you know that the wood wears down and doesn’t leave square edges like the examples we see from back then.

Romans living in Britain who were of really any level of wealth beyond a basic farmer who couldn't afford to pack up and move left to the island at the collapse of Roman power in that region and the retreat of the Legions

They all left when the empire collapsed , there are Roman records of 12000 boys aged under 18 paying for transit to what is now France, this occurred when the legions retreated to south coast of now England Anyone with the means would have fled pronto style. Within 10 years of Romans leaving , England and Wales would have been in uproar with serious gang warfare for control .

Use a proxy. For *Firefox* and *Opera* there are several and there probably are for most other browsers.

I thought it was because strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.

@@smallpoly10 🤣🤣🤣👍🏾👌🏾

​@@smallpoly10 Well you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you.

Two points, King Arthur lived in a city, Camelot is a made up name for a real place, like Viraconium maybe. And his name was King Owain, Arth was his Brythonic battle name or Ursus in the Latin. You know, Arth-Ursus or Arthur. So far the only researcher clever enough to put it all together is Graham Phillips and his two King Arthur books.

No to what?

@@shaolin1derpalm Read the title to the video, Answer no. Fictional character do not own castles.

Interesting, I think Geoffrey of Monmouth may disagree but... I like it😊👍🏾👌🏾

@@dwhite8997 The truth is that King Uther and Arthur were of Welsh and such SW Cornwall/Devon/Dorset/Somerset ancestry - doesn't disprove any statements. It is known that these highest rulers and the Pendragon Camelot entourage of their 69-600s CE period were a majority of western Welsh Christians, Celtic Christians, not Roman Catholic Augustinian conversions of the eastern Anglo-Saxons of the 500s CE. It is known that Petra can hold up to 30,000 people with over 200 rain cisterns and waterways. It is this portion of history, providing international Welsh/ancient British networks and colonies. Just as much as the French Outremer start of the 2nd Reich Crusades - that House of Boulogne was international. With Mediterranean trading around the entire Roman Empire period (and the British Isles), there is no dysfunction that the Welsh/British could also be part of the Mideast heritage. And having read and support Geoffrey's statements, he makes no direct statement of Arthur being on such and such specific landed city in Wales and SW Britain. You only have Welsh-ified and Olde Englishe-ified translated/transliterated names of what were Mideast locations - that others take as specific Welsh/British regions and towns. No one can validate that the ancestor of King Arthur (having Arthurius of Breton or British residency) ever has proven historical documents attacking and invading Rome from the WEST. Remove any Germanic Arthurius from the NORTH, and any African Arthurius coming from North Africa from the SOUTH ... only leads to ONE CONCLUSION. Within the period of 69-200s CE, Arthurius came from the EAST westward into the Roman Empire. The only area of that time that had any valid civilization (Egypt, North Africa, Britain, and surrounding Mediterranean (and Byzantine) that would be an invasive region. The only area comes from the ancient Pendragon/Petra region of Midian North Saudi Arabia.

Like almost ever hill in british isles, it is a neolithic site originally lol

Umm...

Too logical for anyone to believe lol

They are constantly needing to be helped by an entire crew , rescued at times and have men do their jobs for them in half the episodes but I guess I see what you mean ? It clearly worked -- the producers placed women in the main roles hoping to get more female viewership because women tend to only want to watch shows which have some sort of representation of themselves ; sort of like how excited birds get when they see their own reflection .. their adorable tiny bird brains get all excited.

Very expensive and risky.