Lost cities / archaeology / ancient history

I wonder if Geoffrey of Monmouth's work will be reviewed in light of this?

Fascinating to think what else he might have accurately reported on...

Well, it's known that the Heinrich Schliemann approach, looking at old legends and trying to gain clues from them, is important, but only if the person doing the work isn't also a charlatan. :)

I'm not familiar with Geoffrey of Monmouth's work so don't know what other stories may be useful for real-world archaeology, but I certainly don't think myth should be dismissed altogether, just treated with caution.

I mean, the Stonehenge connection does look interesting, but they'll need to do some more work yet before it's generally accepted, I would think.