04-25-2012, 08:36 PM
With regard to my question about micro-skeletal remains, I should have mentioned that this is one line of possible investigation for supporting evidence once a prospective battle site has been identified. One man and his auger and microscope might get lucky.
Is 80,000 dead the correct number or not? - I think I've said before that I take the number I'm given because you could parse it any number of different ways and still not know. Sticking to 80,000 does not add 21st Century subjectivity and just leaves 1st century potential bias.
Pigs! - I hadn't thought of those. Actually, I don't want to!
Quintius Clavus thank you for the pointer to Ancient Warfare mag. Sadly the first part is out of stock. I'll try to get copies from the British Library. And, Towton, what a coincidence! Yesterday I was in an email conversation with Malin Holst of YORK OSTEOARCHAEOLOGY LTD about micro-skeletal residues. Malin has conducted much of the bone analysis at Towton. No mention of micro-skeletal remains though. I shall follow-up your reference to Kalkriese - thanks.
Regards, Steve
Is 80,000 dead the correct number or not? - I think I've said before that I take the number I'm given because you could parse it any number of different ways and still not know. Sticking to 80,000 does not add 21st Century subjectivity and just leaves 1st century potential bias.
Pigs! - I hadn't thought of those. Actually, I don't want to!
Quintius Clavus thank you for the pointer to Ancient Warfare mag. Sadly the first part is out of stock. I'll try to get copies from the British Library. And, Towton, what a coincidence! Yesterday I was in an email conversation with Malin Holst of YORK OSTEOARCHAEOLOGY LTD about micro-skeletal residues. Malin has conducted much of the bone analysis at Towton. No mention of micro-skeletal remains though. I shall follow-up your reference to Kalkriese - thanks.
Regards, Steve
