Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2009 - Dating of "Haltern-Horizon" at stakes ?
#1
O.K. First for the angry part: we are back in times where you get thrown out in the midst of writing some lines here and pressing "Preview".
There were recent times when I seemed not to have this problem.
So--- now back "to the meat" :
As usual I found a good reference on my favourite Blogspot Archeonews:
[url:2j9xobuo]http://www.epoc.de/artikel/994247&_z=798890[/url]
Therein German archeologist Dr. Rudolf Aßkamp from the Haltern Museum introduces the results of the most recent research on 24 male skeletons found in a potery oven during the 90's to the press. These skeletons did not belong to Romans, but to Germans, where some came from the vicinity of Haltern, some from more remote areas like the Black Forrest or Bohemia, so the results of analyzing the composition of their teeth.
Dr. Aßmann goes on to reason that these Germans may have attacked the Haltern main camp after the Varian battle and the subsequent withdrawal of roman forces behind the Rhine."No single germanic group was so stupid to attack this military installment as long as it was fully manned with thousands of roman professional soldiers." It was therefore more probable that they later attacked the roman "leftover" forces, he goes on.
In that case the roman forces would have left Haltern not as assumed till today, in 9 AD, --- but later.
This reasoning would pose far-reaching consequences on German Roman Archeology.
Up to now the so-called "Haltern-Horizon" (=the "youngest" roman finds at Haltern) has been the benchmark for dating roman findings of the augustean era before or after 9 AD.
"If the Haltern Horizon" is shifted backwards for 5 or 6 years, we have to assume that many other finds are younger than previously assumed," says Aßkamp.
------------------
So far -- so good ?
Now what about prisoners or hostages butchered shortly after the news about the Varus Battle got 'round ?? :roll:
Interesting theses, but alas, don't we live in interesting times anyway ? :wink:

Greez

Simplex

Mission accomplished at last . Big Grin

P.S.: More on this here (also in German)
[url:2j9xobuo]http://www.ruhrnachrichten.de/haltern/lokal/halo/art900,554602[/url] a
lso from Archeonews, but earlier
(More informations-- more precisely)
Siggi K.
Reply
#2
Thanks for another interesting posting from the German press, Siggi -- as usual, we are indebted to your hunting skills!

As for the redating of Haltern, the case seems rather precarious, to say the least! First, they say that "Die zeitliche Einordnung des Fundes sei zwar nicht ganz sicher", and then suddenly "Wir können jetzt davon ausgehen, dass die Römer das Lager viel später als direkt nach der Varusschlacht aufgegeben haben. Vermutlich erst 16 nach Christus unter Kaiser Tiberius."

I think they are missing a step! Or is it me -- have I missed a step!? :?
posted by Duncan B Campbell
https://ninth-legion.blogspot.com/
Reply
#3
Quote:First, they say that "Die zeitliche Einordnung des Fundes sei zwar nicht ganz sicher", and then suddenly "Wir können jetzt davon ausgehen, dass die Römer das Lager viel später als direkt nach der Varusschlacht aufgegeben haben. Vermutlich erst 16 nach Christus unter Kaiser Tiberius."
I think its not unusual in the scientific community to avoid 100% "this-or-that" statements ... may be this contradiction sounds more harsh in the translation as in German ... I interpret it as them being quite sure internally, while just reluctant to make it a fact proven beyond doubt.
After all this new assessment seems to be based on conjencture, and there could be other possibilities as to why these bodies could have been buried there, than after an attack on a small Roman garrison. Not likely ones though.
[size=85:2j3qgc52]- Carsten -[/size]
Reply
#4
Quote:O.K. First for the angry part: we are back in times where you get thrown out in the midst of writing some lines here and pressing "Preview".
There were recent times when I seemed not to have this problem.
Ahhh, that's what I do it all for: members who think they're using a free professional service with a complaints department...
Greets!

Jasper Oorthuys
Webmaster & Editor, Ancient Warfare magazine
Reply
#5
Ave,

I have heard the term Haltern Horizon before but never really paid that much attention to it. Did not know it was associated with germans, bodies and ovens, Getting a bad feeling from that,...but I guess from the post the germans were on the receiving end in that instance. Remarkable , how a few words can generate negative imagery in ones mind.

Are there some commercially available sources on this?

Regards from the Balkans, Arminius Primus aka Al
ARMINIVS PRIMVS

MACEDONICA PRIMA

aka ( Al Fuerst)




FESTINA LENTE
Reply
#6
Quote:I have heard the term Haltern Horizon before but never really paid that much attention to it. Did not know it was associated with germans, bodies and ovens, ...
Shhhh ... don't mention the you-know-what.

To be serious, the so-called "Haltern horizon" is not normally associated with bodies and ovens. Just for the record -- because I sense you actually know this, but you're just pulling our leg -- it's an archaeological dating horizon, based principally on the fact that no Roman coins arrived at the Haltern Hauptlager after AD 9, so if there was a small garrison still rattling around in that enormous fortress after that date, they must have been pretty angry. Either that, or they had a lot of back-pay to look forward to. On the other hand, later German and Frankish occupation on the site is well known, including a grave dug right in the middle of the base -- asserting ownership long after the Romans had left?

Quote:I interpret it as them being quite sure internally, while just reluctant to make it a fact proven beyond doubt.
If they're so sure, maybe they'll let us into the secret? What new evidence have they found to radically alter the accepted dating? (What new dating evidence could they find ..? A dated writing tablet saying "Today, the boss says we are pulling out of Germany"? Smile )

Of course, no archaeologist is ever expected to present a "fact proven beyond doubt" -- for that, we usually need several strands of various types of evidence, rather than just a few calcified bones. Smile (That seems to be what this story is all about, isn't it?) But it's nice when archaeologists set out the basis for their theory. Particularly when it's such an important theory. (It's also nice when they admit that it is only a theory.)

Maybe there's funding at stake ... :wink:
posted by Duncan B Campbell
https://ninth-legion.blogspot.com/
Reply
#7
Quote:based principally on the fact that no Roman coins arrived at the Haltern Hauptlager after AD 9
But this "fact" is based on the assumption that certain coins were not produced after a certain date. This assum ption is based alone on the iconography of the coins, ignoring the possibility that coins were produced despite the motive no longer being actual. However, there are many examples where coins were made although the motives were no longer up to date. The "VAR" countermark is under debate meanwhile as well, as coins were found which had a "VAR" mark over a "TIB" mark. See therefore:
[url:ml28klqm]http://www.romancoins.info/CMK-Varus-Debate.html[/url]
Christian K.

No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.

Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
Reply
#8
[url:2li4j8sg]http://www.welt.de/kultur/article3700819/Funde-naehren-Zweifel-am-Ort-der-Varusschlacht.html[/url]
Christian K.

No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.

Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
Reply
#9
Quote:But this "fact" is based on the assumption that certain coins were not produced after a certain date.
Strictly speaking, the assumption (a reasonable one, I think) is that the garrison in Haltern were paid regularly -- otherwise they'd most likely mutiny -- so the archaeological record should reflect this in the quantities of coins represented. The coin list from Haltern is notable because there is not a single example of the so-called Lugdunum II coins, which were issued in bulk from AD 10, no doubt to pay the military (another assumption, but a reasonable one). I hope you will agree that it is at least suspicious that none of these coins (found at other major military sites: Mainz and Windisch spring to mind) turned up at Haltern. If there were still troops there, what were they being paid with?

The Varus countermark is a side-issue here. But it is interesting that only 4 VAR coins (iirc) were found at Haltern, amongst several hundred coins in total.

Neither of these facts proves anything on its own. But, in combination, they suggest a plausible hypothesis: namely, that the site was not occupied after around AD 10. The Varus disaster seems a likely cause. (Another assumption, but a reasonable one, I think.)

Quote:The "VAR" countermark is under debate meanwhile as well, as coins were found which had a "VAR" mark over a "TIB" mark. See therefore: [url:13ns2q33]http://www.romancoins.info/CMK-Varus-Debate.html[/url]
Very interesting. Thanks for the link. I wonder if this is behind the "new theory". (By the way, just to complicate matters, Augustus issued coins in Tiberius' name, but they generally read TI CAESAR AVGVSTI F.)
posted by Duncan B Campbell
https://ninth-legion.blogspot.com/
Reply
#10
Quote:[url:1qi6jh59]http://www.welt.de/kultur/article3700819/Funde-naehren-Zweifel-am-Ort-der-Varusschlacht.html[/url]
Wow -- I'm impressed by the contortions archaeologists can perform when they want to present a fresh new theory to the press!

If I've read this correctly -- please correct my interpretation if I have misunderstood, Christian -- the new theory seems to be:

(a) German corpses found in pottery oven outside the Haltern Hauptlager must have arrived after AD 9, because the Germans were too smart to try and attack a fully-manned Roman fortress;
(b) Haltern coin series ends in AD 9, so the above attack must be post-AD9, when most of the Romans had left;
© Coin series at Kalkriese also ends in AD 9, but some archaeologists would like to interpret this as one of Germanicus' battlefields, despite the coin dating;
(d) If Germanicus' army at Kalkriese could be paid with 10-year old coins, so could the garrison at Haltern;
(e) Haltern must have been garrisoned by Germanicus' troops

Surely no self-respecting archaeologist would propose such a bizarre series of assumptions. Confusedhock: I must be missing something. :?
posted by Duncan B Campbell
https://ninth-legion.blogspot.com/
Reply
#11
IMO there´s too much speculation, again. As far as I can see the the deposition of the corpses in the oven has no absolute date. Not much more to say, IMO.

The coin-thing "9 AD" is far from safe itself, both Kalkriese and Haltern. Questions in this context:

1, How far does a coin travel in a given time?
2, How many coins do you need for a troop? (I mean, if the Roman soldier buys sthg. in a place like Haltern, where does the money go to? It´s not evaporating when spent... so that area probably doesn´t necessarily NEED new coins)
3, How much money was in reality really GIVEN to a Roman soldier?
4. Are the countermarks on some coins changing their value in form of a "token" / credit system?



For a summary of open questions and contradictions in this discussion see
[url:39um7iqg]http://www.clades-variana.com/Die%20Fundmuenzen.htm[/url]
Christian K.

No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.

Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
Reply
#12
Quote:(a) German corpses found in pottery oven outside the Haltern Hauptlager must have arrived after AD 9, because the Germans were too smart to try and attack a fully-manned Roman fortress;
Hmm.. I don't quite seee the logic of there. What does 'smart' have to do with that? Warriors of those times did stranger things.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#13
Quote:
D B Campbell:2alib6xr Wrote:(a) German corpses found in pottery oven outside the Haltern Hauptlager must have arrived after AD 9, because the Germans were too smart to try and attack a fully-manned Roman fortress;
Hmm.. I don't quite seee the logic of there. What does 'smart' have to do with that? Warriors of those times did stranger things.
I agree, Robert. No logic at all. Also, as far as I can tell, the bones were not taken from a stratified context, so we cannot tell how long the pottery kiln had been out of service when the bodies were deposited.

Quote:1, How far does a coin travel in a given time?
2, How many coins do you need for a troop? (I mean, if the Roman soldier buys sthg. in a place like Haltern, where does the money go to? It´s not evaporating when spent... so that area probably doesn´t necessarily NEED new coins)
3, How much money was in reality really GIVEN to a Roman soldier?
4. Are the countermarks on some coins changing their value in form of a "token" / credit system?
Interesting questions, Christian.

(1) I don't think anyone has any idea. But it's usually accepted (another reasonable assumption!) that coins minted in bulk for military pay were delivered to army bases every year.
(2) I don't think anyone has any idea -- I've never seen a study of this. But, after each soldier's "deductions", there was a certain amount to be handed over to each man. Much of this would go into savings, with the rest to be spent amongst the "camp followers". :wink: I agree with your point that there might be enough coinage already circulating in a military base to cover a couple of years' pay. But remember, as the men retired -- at Haltern, maybe 500 men per annum --, they withdrew their savings. Sooner or later (probably sooner) another delivery would be required to cover the next round of pay.
(3) I don't think anyone has any idea. But after "deductions", is it about half pay? (I'm sure someone will work it out for us. Smile )
(4) I don't think anyone has any idea. But you make an interesting point.
posted by Duncan B Campbell
https://ninth-legion.blogspot.com/
Reply
#14
Haltern is often identified, and probably is, the "Aliso" referred to in the sources as the base to which the survivors of the Varus disaster fell back, and held out against Arminius' assaults and siege, and eventually broke out - see e.g.Jona Lendering's articles regarding the "Clades Variana' and Haltern on his Livius.org site.

The fort, originally a temporary summer camp for two legions, had subsequently been built as a permanent base for one, probably the XIX th Legion. It appears to have been hastily abandoned around AD 9/10 - probably in the winter. As Jona says;"It was hastily evacuated: in one of the potter's pits, at least twenty-four soldiers were buried; weapons were stored away; coins were buried in hoards; much pottery survives intact."

What has changed is that the 24 bodies have now been identified as German, rather than Roman.....and what more natural than if prisoners taken in the fighting had been maltreated, or murdered. The evacuating Romans might well have wanted to get rid of any evidence by cremating the bodies in the potters kiln, as Siggi suggested.....

This is also suggested by the fact that some of the German bodies were local, others from far away, which implies part of a large army drawn from a large area such as Arminius' army. If correct this would largely undermine the archaeologists theory that the Germans would not attack a fully manned fort, for the exact reverse was true after the "Varus Schlact". A large Germanic army under Arminius attacked a seriously undermanned Roman Fort whose garrison had mostly been massacred previously.

I would therefore tend to agree with the consensus here, that there is insufficient evidence to move the "Haltern Horizon"....
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)

"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
Reply
#15
For my taste the whole construct includes too many assumptions to start with. As far as I can see the "Haltern Horizon" is archaeologically NOT dated absolutely. Until that changes, it is IMO better not to speculate too much, and to be content with the statement that we don´t know yet when exactly the site ended. Identifying it as Aliso is also not a 100% waterproof thing.
See also for a summary of the problems / Aliso:
[url:3mq2wmzu]http://www.clades-variana.com/aliso.htm[/url]
Christian K.

No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.

Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  ...... and a new one at Haltern ! Simplex 2 320 10-07-2021, 06:31 PM
Last Post: Simplex
  Marching Camp stakes use Anonymous 18 2,951 09-05-2002, 07:03 PM
Last Post: richsc

Forum Jump: