04-30-2008, 12:54 PM
Quote:I remember that the view that they were lined up side-by-side was accepted by the 'experts'.
Then on that TV prog where they turned 8 members of the public into 'Roman Soldiers' the soldiers came up with the idea of the caltrops based upon seeing and then testing the little ledge on the sample marching fort ditch they had to dig. The 'experts' looked a little peeved that they had been out-thought.hock:
I expect to be told that all good re-enactors had worked this out ages before....
It wasn't quite like that, Simon. I'm not the only 'expert' to have trashed the 'lined up side-by-side' view, but you can read my stuff on the calthrop theory in Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies for 1993 and summarised in Roman Art of War 1999. Chris Haines had let me play with some of the ESG's palisade stakes at an English Heritage extravaganza at Maiden Castle in the early 90s, I spoke about it at the Military Equipment conference at Leiden in about 94, and it went from there. If you watch the Timewatch programme I did with the BBC that was broadcast in 2001, you'll see me trashing the 'lined up side-by-side' view on screen, and we then played with the calthrop design on a short section of rampart that the 'soldiers' had built. Far from being 'peeved', I was - and from my perspective do look on screen - genuinely delighted that the experimental archaeology had actually done something that suggested a possible alternative to my design that is illustrated by Ian Dennis in the JRMES article and the book. It was that afternoon that made a week of stomping around in a flooded field in the middle of winter worthwhile! There you go - a nice example of how research can develop :wink:
Incidentally, the JRMES paper also discusses the potential use of palisade stakes in calthrop formation as ericius or hedgehog, in the gates of camps and on the battlefield.
