03-31-2004, 02:12 AM
I don't claim to be an expert on Kalkriese, nor anything else that happened 2000 years ago, but this whole debate raised a series of questions in my mind, that I haven't seen answered. Let me say right off that I don't have an opinion either way as to what Kalkriese was.<br>
Firstly, if, as Dan believes , Kalkriese is the sight of a Rourke's Drift type skirmish/battle in 15AD, why wouldn't the same question apply as to why there are nor significant artifact finds beyond a few miles of the site. Presumably, if this was a strategically placed military outpost, regardless of size, then not only should there be a large amount of artifacts surrounding the site in many different directions, but shouldn't there also be evidence of this much talked about trail in this area as well? Presumably this post was reinforced and resupplied on a regular basis, which would indicate the presence of trails leading to and from it. It also seems likely, that if we buy into Dan's argument that this was a Rourke's Drift than there is a good chance that Germanicus's whole force marched past(or very close to) this post, which I assume would also require(or create) a significant foot trail.<br>
Secondly, if the Romans emerged victorious this encounter as Dan suggests by defending the post from behind earthworks: Why would there be so many artifacts outside the walls of the post? Even if some of these pieces of equipment had been left behind either because the wearers/bearers/owners of said equipment were killed or had to beat a hasty retreat, than why did the Romans not police up there gear after the battle was finished? Alternatively, why didn't the besieging Germans take the gear themselves?<br>
Thirdly, why do the presence of coins from 12-14 AD rule out that this was not a Varic Battlefield? Presumably Germanicus's forces could have dropped coins in the area of the old battlefield right?<br>
Lastly, why is the pro-Varus argument for Kalkriese based around the idea that the Kalkriese site has to be the spot of a large battle/ambush/choke point in the Varus battle. Couldn't it have been an area where a small unit(cohort, century, ala) was trying to escape from a larger battle to the east, north or south? Similarly, if Kalkriese was a Roman post in 15 AD then is it not a good bet it had been in 9 AD, as well, and that Germanicus's force used it as a march objective since it was a known outpost. Could this argument not be taken a step further, and one might theorize that some escaping Roman soldiers in 9AD tried to reach the post at Kalkriese, and were overcome, and that their bodies/equipment were later found by Germanicus's troops in 15AD? <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rufuscaius>RufusCaius</A> at: 3/31/04 4:14 am<br></i>
Firstly, if, as Dan believes , Kalkriese is the sight of a Rourke's Drift type skirmish/battle in 15AD, why wouldn't the same question apply as to why there are nor significant artifact finds beyond a few miles of the site. Presumably, if this was a strategically placed military outpost, regardless of size, then not only should there be a large amount of artifacts surrounding the site in many different directions, but shouldn't there also be evidence of this much talked about trail in this area as well? Presumably this post was reinforced and resupplied on a regular basis, which would indicate the presence of trails leading to and from it. It also seems likely, that if we buy into Dan's argument that this was a Rourke's Drift than there is a good chance that Germanicus's whole force marched past(or very close to) this post, which I assume would also require(or create) a significant foot trail.<br>
Secondly, if the Romans emerged victorious this encounter as Dan suggests by defending the post from behind earthworks: Why would there be so many artifacts outside the walls of the post? Even if some of these pieces of equipment had been left behind either because the wearers/bearers/owners of said equipment were killed or had to beat a hasty retreat, than why did the Romans not police up there gear after the battle was finished? Alternatively, why didn't the besieging Germans take the gear themselves?<br>
Thirdly, why do the presence of coins from 12-14 AD rule out that this was not a Varic Battlefield? Presumably Germanicus's forces could have dropped coins in the area of the old battlefield right?<br>
Lastly, why is the pro-Varus argument for Kalkriese based around the idea that the Kalkriese site has to be the spot of a large battle/ambush/choke point in the Varus battle. Couldn't it have been an area where a small unit(cohort, century, ala) was trying to escape from a larger battle to the east, north or south? Similarly, if Kalkriese was a Roman post in 15 AD then is it not a good bet it had been in 9 AD, as well, and that Germanicus's force used it as a march objective since it was a known outpost. Could this argument not be taken a step further, and one might theorize that some escaping Roman soldiers in 9AD tried to reach the post at Kalkriese, and were overcome, and that their bodies/equipment were later found by Germanicus's troops in 15AD? <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rufuscaius>RufusCaius</A> at: 3/31/04 4:14 am<br></i>
