| # | Polity | Coded Value | Tags | Year(s) | Edit | Desc |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
"Whereas no sites are documented as fortified or military observatories during the Formative and Classic periods, approximately one quarter of sites are during the Epiclassic and one-third of sites are during the Postclassic."
[1]
[1]: (Carballo and Pluckhahn 2007: 615) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/MUW5MHB7. |
||||||
|
"Whereas no sites are documented as fortified or military observatories during the Formative and Classic periods, approximately one quarter of sites are during the Epiclassic and one-third of sites are during the Postclassic."
[1]
[1]: (Carballo and Pluckhahn 2007: 615) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/MUW5MHB7. |
||||||
|
Would not survive archaeologically, only detectable via excavation.
|
||||||
|
Would not survive archaeologically, only detectable via excavation.
|
||||||
|
"Whereas no sites are documented as fortified or military observatories during the Formative and Classic periods, approximately one quarter of sites are during the Epiclassic and one-third of sites are during the Postclassic."
[1]
[1]: (Carballo and Pluckhahn 2007: 615) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/MUW5MHB7. |
||||||
|
"For urban centres in the rest of Mesoamerica, the lack of perimeter walls and defensive settings is striking. The undefended nature of Aztec towns, for example, contrasts sharply with the ethnohistoric record of Aztec warfare".
[1]
[1]: (Smith 2003: 38) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/WEIQNSNP |
||||||
|
"For fortifications, Aztec sites show a broad range with some totally exposed on valley floors and others being walled or at elevations. Tenochtitlan only had walls around the sacred precinct but of course had natural fortification by being an island in a lake that could be entered only through a few causeways. At the high end of fortification was the Tlaxcalan stronghold of Tepeticpac, up on a high hill and encircled by walls. That was their strategy of resistance against the Aztec empire. Huexotla is a site in the domain of Texcoco with a large wall and their were fortified garrisons on the frontier between the Aztec and Tarascan empires, in west Mexico. But probably more sites were not fortified than were. There was nothing comparable to the medieval European pattern or earlier fortified city states of Mesopotamia or elsewhere in Eurasia."
[1]
[1]: (Carballo 2019: pers. comm. to E. Cioni and G. Nazzaro) |
||||||
|
Not clear whether this information applies to pre-contact polities. "The Hawaiians generally did not build fortifications, but non-combatants could find sacred sanctuary in places of refuge known as pu’uhonua." Pg 4.
[1]
[1]: Hommon, Robert, J. 2013. The Ancient Hawaiian State: Origins of a Political Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
||||||
|
Not clear whether this information applies to pre-contact polities. "The Hawaiians generally did not build fortifications, but non-combatants could find sacred sanctuary in places of refuge known as pu’uhonua." Pg 4.
[1]
[1]: Hommon, Robert, J. 2013. The Ancient Hawaiian State: Origins of a Political Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
||||||
|
"The Hawaiians generally did not build fortifications, but non-combatants could find sacred sanctuary in places of refuge known as pu’uhonua." Pg 4.
[1]
"A wooden palisade was the case at Kamehameha I’s compound at Pakaka".
[2]
[1]: Hommon, Robert, J. 2013. The Ancient Hawaiian State: Origins of a Political Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [2]: P Christiaan Klieger. 1998. Moku’Ula: Maui’s Sacred Island. Bishop Museum Press. |
||||||
|
Inferred from the following. "About two millennia ago, during the Middle Woodland period, which spanned several hundred years, intergroup conflict ending in violence was largely absent from eastern North America. Compared to both earlier Archaic hunter-gatherers and later village agriculturalists, few Middle Woodland skeletons have projectile points lodged in bones, distinctive stone-axe injuries, or signs of mutilation such as decapitation and scalping. [...] The scarcity of such injuries is not a result of inadequate sampling, since there are large and well-preserved skeletal collections dating to this period, especially from the Midwest. A rather sudden adoption of food-procurement practices that shifted the balance between resources and consumers to a time of relative plenty presumably played a big part in establishing conditions conducive to openness among otherwise separate groups."
[1]
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
Inferred from the following. "About two millennia ago, during the Middle Woodland period, which spanned several hundred years, intergroup conflict ending in violence was largely absent from eastern North America. Compared to both earlier Archaic hunter-gatherers and later village agriculturalists, few Middle Woodland skeletons have projectile points lodged in bones, distinctive stone-axe injuries, or signs of mutilation such as decapitation and scalping. [...] The scarcity of such injuries is not a result of inadequate sampling, since there are large and well-preserved skeletal collections dating to this period, especially from the Midwest. A rather sudden adoption of food-procurement practices that shifted the balance between resources and consumers to a time of relative plenty presumably played a big part in establishing conditions conducive to openness among otherwise separate groups."
[1]
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
Inferred from the following. "About two millennia ago, during the Middle Woodland period, which spanned several hundred years, intergroup conflict ending in violence was largely absent from eastern North America. Compared to both earlier Archaic hunter-gatherers and later village agriculturalists, few Middle Woodland skeletons have projectile points lodged in bones, distinctive stone-axe injuries, or signs of mutilation such as decapitation and scalping. [...] The scarcity of such injuries is not a result of inadequate sampling, since there are large and well-preserved skeletal collections dating to this period, especially from the Midwest. A rather sudden adoption of food-procurement practices that shifted the balance between resources and consumers to a time of relative plenty presumably played a big part in establishing conditions conducive to openness among otherwise separate groups." The situation only changed "[l]ate in the first millennium AD".
[1]
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
Inferred from the following. "About two millennia ago, during the Middle Woodland period, which spanned several hundred years, intergroup conflict ending in violence was largely absent from eastern North America. Compared to both earlier Archaic hunter-gatherers and later village agriculturalists, few Middle Woodland skeletons have projectile points lodged in bones, distinctive stone-axe injuries, or signs of mutilation such as decapitation and scalping. [...] The scarcity of such injuries is not a result of inadequate sampling, since there are large and well-preserved skeletal collections dating to this period, especially from the Midwest. A rather sudden adoption of food-procurement practices that shifted the balance between resources and consumers to a time of relative plenty presumably played a big part in establishing conditions conducive to openness among otherwise separate groups." The situation only changed "[l]ate in the first millennium AD".
[1]
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
Inferred from the following. "About two millennia ago, during the Middle Woodland period, which spanned several hundred years, intergroup conflict ending in violence was largely absent from eastern North America. Compared to both earlier Archaic hunter-gatherers and later village agriculturalists, few Middle Woodland skeletons have projectile points lodged in bones, distinctive stone-axe injuries, or signs of mutilation such as decapitation and scalping. [...] The scarcity of such injuries is not a result of inadequate sampling, since there are large and well-preserved skeletal collections dating to this period, especially from the Midwest. A rather sudden adoption of food-procurement practices that shifted the balance between resources and consumers to a time of relative plenty presumably played a big part in establishing conditions conducive to openness among otherwise separate groups." The situation only changed "[l]ate in the first millennium AD".
[1]
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
"Mississippian sites often featured curtain walls with frameworks of stout posts accompanied by large bastions, high embankments, and deep ditches."
[1]
According to the temporal distribution of "131 walled settlements corresponding to Mississippian societies and their immediate predecessors" the breakout point for increasing percent of sites having palisades is around 900-950 CE. 800-950 CE: 0.5% of sites. 1000 CE: 1.5% of sites. 1050 CE: 3% of sites. 1100 CE: 4% of sites. 1200: 7% of sites.
[2]
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 100) [2]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013) |
||||||
|
"The main mound and plaza region of Cahokia was palisaded after ca. A.D. 1200, also indicating a high level of violence."
[1]
"After about A.D. 1100 there is an increase in numbers of palisaded sites (they were present earlier at Toltec)."
[2]
[1]: (Kelly 2014, 22) [2]: (Peregrine/Pauketat 2014, 16) |
||||||
|
The sites of Sleeth and C.W. Cooper were fortified
[1]
. Fortification type is not specified, but, given that Cahokia and East St Louis had been fortified with wooden palisades
[2]
, it seems reasonable to infer that this same type of fortification was used for Oneota sites as well.
[1]: T. Pauketat and J. Brown, The late prehistory and protohistory of Illinois, in J.A. Walthall and T.E. Emerson (eds.) Calumet & fleur-de-lys: archaeology of Indian and French contact in the midcontinent (1992), pp. 77-128 [2]: J. Galloy, The East St. Louis Mound Center: America’s Original “Second City” (2011), in The Cahokian Fall 2011: 11-15 |
||||||
|
In terms of settlement organisation, the main defensive strategy seems to have been to construct larger villages
[1]
.
[1]: Illinois State Museum, Illinois Economy: Settlements (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/post/htmls/ec_settle.html |
||||||
|
"The main mound and plaza region of Cahokia was palisaded after ca. A.D. 1200, also indicating a high level of violence."
[1]
"After about A.D. 1100 there is an increase in numbers of palisaded sites (they were present earlier at Toltec)."
[2]
The center of Cahokia was palisaded "late in the 1100s." This wall was rebuilt at least four times.
[3]
"Ceramic data and radiocarbon dates indicate that construction of all four stockades occurred during the Late Stirling and Moorehead phases and most likely over the one-hundred-year period from about AD 1175 to 1275."
[4]
[1]: (Kelly 2014, 22) [2]: (Peregrine/Pauketat 2014, 16) [3]: (Iseminger 2010, 137) [4]: (Iseminger 2010, 138) |
||||||
|
"The main mound and plaza region of Cahokia was palisaded after ca. A.D. 1200, also indicating a high level of violence."
[1]
"After about A.D. 1100 there is an increase in numbers of palisaded sites (they were present earlier at Toltec)."
[2]
The center of Cahokia was palisaded "late in the 1100s." This wall was rebuilt at least four times.
[3]
"Ceramic data and radiocarbon dates indicate that construction of all four stockades occurred during the Late Stirling and Moorehead phases and most likely over the one-hundred-year period from about AD 1175 to 1275."
[4]
[1]: (Kelly 2014, 22) [2]: (Peregrine/Pauketat 2014, 16) [3]: (Iseminger 2010, 137) [4]: (Iseminger 2010, 138) |
||||||
|
"Mississippian sites often featured curtain walls with frameworks of stout posts accompanied by large bastions, high embankments, and deep ditches."
[1]
According to the temporal distribution of "131 walled settlements corresponding to Mississippian societies and their immediate predecessors" the breakout point for increasing percent of sites having palisades is around 900-950 CE. 800-950 CE: 0.5% of sites. 1000 CE: 1.5% of sites. 1050 CE: 3% of sites. 1100 CE: 4% of sites. 1200: 7% of sites.
[2]
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 100) [2]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013) |
||||||
|
"The term “Memotian” culture is now used to refer to 40 circular ramparted and moated sites (banteay kou in Khmer) in a hilly area of east Cambodia and a corner of southwest Vietnam measuring 85 kilometers east-west and 35 kilometers north-south, occupied between the early third millennium to early first millennium bce; about 15 have been intensively studied. The oldest sites seem to cluster in the west of this area, from whence they spread gradually east. Their components include an outer rampart, interior depression or “moat”, and a gap in the rampart, probably an entrance/exit."
[1]
[1]: (Miksic and Goh 2016: 113) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/2EZ3CBBS. |
||||||
|
"The term “Memotian” culture is now used to refer to 40 circular ramparted and moated sites (banteay kou in Khmer) in a hilly area of east Cambodia and a corner of southwest Vietnam measuring 85 kilometers east-west and 35 kilometers north-south, occupied between the early third millennium to early first millennium bce; about 15 have been intensively studied. The oldest sites seem to cluster in the west of this area, from whence they spread gradually east. Their components include an outer rampart, interior depression or “moat”, and a gap in the rampart, probably an entrance/exit."
[1]
[1]: (Miksic and Goh 2016: 113) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/2EZ3CBBS. |
||||||
|
’The enclosure of Banteay Prei Nokor is the largest and most formidable of which we have any knowledge in pre-Angkorian Cambodia. It was surrounded by a large earthen rampart, probably surmounted by a wooden palisade. The rampart is about 2.50 kilometers square. A moat, about 100 meters wide, surrounded the rampart [...].’
[1]
’This was the greatest blow Cambodia had suffered since its conquest by the Malays. The Cham fleet sailed up the Tonle Sap and probably the Siemreap river to Yasodharapura (576, 164). The wooden palisades offered no adequate defense. The wooden residences and public buildings and many temples with their gilded spires and idols of gold were sacked or burned.’
[2]
[1]: (Briggs 1951, pg. 76) [2]: (Briggs 1951, p. 207) |
||||||
|
’The enclosure of Banteay Prei Nokor is the largest and most formidable of which we have any knowledge in pre-Angkorian Cambodia. It was surrounded by a large earthen rampart, probably surmounted by a wooden palisade. The rampart is about 2.50 kilometers square. A moat, about 100 meters wide, surrounded the rampart [...].’
[1]
’This was the greatest blow Cambodia had suffered since its conquest by the Malays. The Cham fleet sailed up the Tonle Sap and probably the Siemreap river to Yasodharapura (576, 164). The wooden palisades offered no adequate defense. The wooden residences and public buildings and many temples with their gilded spires and idols of gold were sacked or burned.’
[2]
[1]: (Briggs 1951, pg. 76) [2]: (Briggs 1951, p. 207) |
||||||
|
No references identified in the literature.
|
||||||
|
’The initial move seems to have been to Srei Santhor, about 30 km (19 miles) northeast of Phnom Penh, at some time in the fourteenth century; then, briefly, to Phnom Penh itself. By about 1528, the Cambodian court under its first great Post-Angkorian king, Ang Chan I, had moved once and for all to the all to the Quatre Bras region, establishing a new capital at Lovek (Longvek), on the right bank of the Tonle Sap River, 50 km (30 miles) north of Phnom Penh. Love, like Udong and Phnom Penh- the town s that succeeded it as the capital- was thoroughly international, with foreign quarters for Malay, Japanese, and Chinese traders (there were as many as 3,000 of the last in the 1540s). There Ang Chan (who really did exist) built a golden palace and at least four major wats, erecting a huge, four-faced Buddha of wood, the stone foundation of which survive in one of the town’s vicars. The capital was fortified by earthen ramparts topped with palisades; these ramparts, which form a huge rectangle, are still visible.’
[1]
[1]: (Coe 2003, pp. 208-209) |
||||||
|
No references in the literature.
|
||||||
|
’The people make fortifications of wood...’
[1]
Indian military terms surviving in Javanese include ’fortress’ and ’siege’.
[2]
[1]: (Coedes 1968, 126) [2]: (Kumara 2007, 161) Sasiprabha Kumara. 2007. Sanskrit Across Cultures. Special Centre for Sanskrit Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University. New Delhi. |
||||||
|
’The people make fortifications of wood...’
[1]
Indian military terms surviving in Javanese include ’fortress’ and ’siege’.
[2]
[1]: (Coedes 1968, 126) [2]: (Kumara 2007, 161) Sasiprabha Kumara. 2007. Sanskrit Across Cultures. Special Centre for Sanskrit Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University. New Delhi. |
||||||
|
Indian military terms surviving in Javanese include ’fortress’ and ’siege’.
[1]
"At the time, Singapore’s defenses included not only the fortified earthen wall but also a stockade-type structure made of wood. The Singaporeans withstood this initial Majapahit attack, but that did not remain the case."
[2]
ET: Singapore had defenses of earth and wood when Majapahit attacked. Surely there were similar defenses in Majapahit, if not the capital city then some smaller towns. Since there was no explanation for the code of absent will change code to inferred present.
[1]: (Kumara 2007, 161) Sasiprabha Kumara. 2007. Sanskrit Across Cultures. Special Centre for Sanskrit Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University. New Delhi. [2]: (Abshire 2011, 23) Jean E Abshire. 2011. The History of Singapore. Greenwood. Santa Barbara. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
There was a wide variety of types of fortification, including temporary marching camps, wooden forts, stone forts, fortresses for legion concentrations, long walls (e.g., Hadrian’s) with mile castles and lookout towers.
|
||||||
|
Fortifications including wooden forts present in preceding Roman Principate
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Preiser-Kapeller says present.
[1]
"Like their ancestors the antique Romans, the Byzantines dug camp every night, surrounding it with a ditch and palisade."
[2]
[1]: (Johannes Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (O’Rourke 2010, 8) O’Rourke, M. 2010. The Land Forces of the Roman (Byzantine) Empire in the 10th Century. Canberra. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Preiser-Kapeller says present.
[1]
"Like their ancestors the antique Romans, the Byzantines dug camp every night, surrounding it with a ditch and palisade."
[2]
[1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (O’Rourke 2010, 8) O’Rourke, M. 2010. The Land Forces of the Roman (Byzantine) Empire in the 10th Century. Canberra. |
||||||
|
Preiser-Kapeller says present.
[1]
"Like their ancestors the antique Romans, the Byzantines dug camp every night, surrounding it with a ditch and palisade."
[2]
[1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (O’Rourke 2010, 8) O’Rourke, M. 2010. The Land Forces of the Roman (Byzantine) Empire in the 10th Century. Canberra. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Wooden palisades used in Callao, Peru
[1]
[1]: (Bradley 2009, 54) Bradley, Peter T. 2009. Spain and the Defense of Peru: Royal Reluctance and Colonial Self-Reliance. Lulu.com. https://www.zotero.org/groups/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/VFMNE6JR |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
According to a military historian (this needs confirmation from a Mauryan specialist): "military fortifications and buildings were mostly made of wood"
[1]
Fortified sites were present in India from the earliest times. Pre-Indus sites have been identified through the presence of stone towers and mud-bricks from 2400 BCE. There are other finds of low walls, and a second larger wall beyond the first.
[2]
The best example of fortifications in the Mauryan Empire are those of the capital city Pataliputra. The defensive perimeter was a palisade with 570 towers, 64 gates, and a moat six plethra wide and 30 ells deep. The walls would have encompassed 33.8 km by 25.5 km.
[3]
[1]: Gabriel, Richard A. The great armies of antiquity. p. 220. [2]: Singh, Sarva Daman. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 1989. p. 120 [3]: Schlingloff, Dieter. Fortified Cities of Ancient India: A Comparative Study. Anthem Press, 2013. p. 39 |
||||||
|
Early Satavahanas (a few hundred years before this time): "The excavations also gave evidence of wooden palisade of the early Satavahana times which might indicate that Ter was one of the thirty fortified towns of the Satavahanas."
[1]
[1]: (Dikshit 1985, 89) K N Dikshit. 1985. Archaeological Perspective of India Since Independence. Books & Books. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
By this period villages were often located on defensible hilltops, away from major routes, and were fortified "either by ravines or by artificial earthworks and multiple palisades," and even watchtowers. Also, "the placement of houses within a palisade may also have been motivated by defensive considerations" and to create defensible corridors.
[1]
[2]
[1]: (Snow 1994: 52) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/TQ4KR3AE. [2]: (Engelbrecht 2003: 92) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/FJ3EAI76. |
||||||
|
Many sources mention palisaded villages, however they are often unspecific with regards to time period. "In prehistoric times Iroquois villages consisted of a number of rectangular structures called “longhouses”... Village sites were usually located on high banks and were pallisaded, indicating defensive priorities. Iroquois men frequently went on extensive hunting forays, leaving their women and children unprotected. This settlement pattern probably provided the best defensive protection under the circumstances.
[1]
Palisaded villages offered protection from maurauding neighbors."
[2]
Some sources suggest that the building of palisades ceased to be a common occurrence after the 17th century: "The necessity of stockading the villages had almost ceased by the beginning of the seventeenth century, and by the close of the century the stockades were abandoned. Villages became less compact, but houses continued to be built near enough together to form a neighborhood."
[3]
[1]: Evaneshko 1975, 19 [2]: Foley 1994, 6 [3]: Lyford 1945, 11 |
||||||
|
Many sources mention palisaded villages, however they are often unspecific with regards to time period. "In prehistoric times Iroquois villages consisted of a number of rectangular structures called “longhouses”... Village sites were usually located on high banks and were pallisaded, indicating defensive priorities. Iroquois men frequently went on extensive hunting forays, leaving their women and children unprotected. This settlement pattern probably provided the best defensive protection under the circumstances.
[1]
Palisaded villages offered protection from maurauding neighbors."
[2]
Some sources suggest that the building of palisades ceased to be a common occurrence after the 17th century: "The necessity of stockading the villages had almost ceased by the beginning of the seventeenth century, and by the close of the century the stockades were abandoned. Villages became less compact, but houses continued to be built near enough together to form a neighborhood."
[3]
[1]: Evaneshko 1975, 19 [2]: Foley 1994, 6 [3]: Lyford 1945, 11 |
||||||
|
Though the Iroquois were known for their impressive fortifications in the seventeenth century, no sources could be found describing Iroquois fortifications in the eighteenth century. This, combined with Lyford’s claim that the Iroquois had abandoned their traditional fortification methods by the end of the seventeenth century, suggests that most of our "fortification" variables cannot be confidently coded as "present". "The necessity of stockading the villages had almost ceased by the beginning of the seventeenth century, and by the close of the century the stockades were abandoned. Villages became less compact, but houses continued to be built near enough together to form a neighborhood."
[1]
[1]: Lyford 1945, 11 |
||||||
|
"The use of wood in the construction of fortifications has been attested at a number of sites (e.g., Alalah, Byblos, Akko (?), and Ashkelon). Given its limited availability and the cost of incorporating it into mudbrick and stone fortifications, it would have been primarily intended to cover closed spaces which could not be spanned by other materials, as it was similarly used in palace construction. Otherwise it was used most extensively for the construction of the doors for gates."
[1]
[1]: Burke (2004:159-160). |
||||||
|
Timber was often used as a building material, being plentiful.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Present in previous and subsequent periods.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
‘Besides the sacrifices for individual cases of illness, there are certain ceremonies which are observed once a year by a whole community or village, and are intended to safeguard its members from dangers of the forest, and from sickness and mishap during the coming twelve months. The principal of these is the Asongtata ceremony. Close to the outskirts of every big village a number of stones may be noticed stuck into the ground, apparently without order or method. These are known by the name of asong, and on them is offered the sacrifice which the Asougtata demands. The sacrifice of a goat takes place, and a month later, that of a langur ( Entcllus monkey), or a bamboo-rat is considered necessary. The animal chosen has a rope fastened round its neck and is led by two men, one on each side of it, to every house in the village. It is taken inside each house in turn, the assembled villagers, meanwhile, beating the walls from the outside, to frighten and drive out any evil spirits which may have taken up their residence within. The round of the village having been made in this manner, the monkey or rat is led to the outskirts of the village, killed by a blow of a duo, which disembowels it, and then crucified on bamboos set up in the ground. Round the crucified animal long, sharp bamboo stakes are placed, which form chcvaux de frisc round about it. Those commemorate the days when such defences surrounded the villages on all sides to keep off human enemies, and they are now a symbol to ward off sickness and dangers to life from the wild animals of the forest. The langur required for the purpose is hunted down some days before, but should it be found impossible to catch one, a brown monkey may take its place; a hulock may not be used.’
[1]
‘In former days, Garo villages were of considerable size and used to contain as many as two or three hundred houses. Liability to attack by a neighbouring village made this necessary, and the danger was further guarded against by sowing the approaches with sharp-pointed bamboo stakes called wamisi in Garo, but better known as panjis. These presented a very formidable obstacle to an enemy, and effectually prevented a sudden attack. Nowadays, when every man is at peace with his neighbour, the necessity no longer exists for large collections of houses, and the difficulty of finding sufficient land close to big villages for the support of their inhabitants, has resulted in their being broken up into small hamlets situated perhaps as much as four or five miles apart, which, however, in most cases, retain the name of the parent village. In order to distinguish them there is added to the name of each hamlet the name of its nokma, or headman.’
[2]
[1]: Playfair, Alan 1909. “Garos”, 92 [2]: Playfair, Alan 1909. “Garos”, 40 |
||||||
|
‘Besides the sacrifices for individual cases of illness, there are certain ceremonies which are observed once a year by a whole community or village, and are intended to safeguard its members from dangers of the forest, and from sickness and mishap during the coming twelve months. The principal of these is the Asongtata ceremony. Close to the outskirts of every big village a number of stones may be noticed stuck into the ground, apparently without order or method. These are known by the name of asong, and on them is offered the sacrifice which the Asougtata demands. The sacrifice of a goat takes place, and a month later, that of a langur ( Entcllus monkey), or a bamboo-rat is considered necessary. The animal chosen has a rope fastened round its neck and is led by two men, one on each side of it, to every house in the village. It is taken inside each house in turn, the assembled villagers, meanwhile, beating the walls from the outside, to frighten and drive out any evil spirits which may have taken up their residence within. The round of the village having been made in this manner, the monkey or rat is led to the outskirts of the village, killed by a blow of a duo, which disembowels it, and then crucified on bamboos set up in the ground. Round the crucified animal long, sharp bamboo stakes are placed, which form chcvaux de frisc round about it. Those commemorate the days when such defences surrounded the villages on all sides to keep off human enemies, and they are now a symbol to ward off sickness and dangers to life from the wild animals of the forest. The langur required for the purpose is hunted down some days before, but should it be found impossible to catch one, a brown monkey may take its place; a hulock may not be used.’
[1]
‘In former days, Garo villages were of considerable size and used to contain as many as two or three hundred houses. Liability to attack by a neighbouring village made this necessary, and the danger was further guarded against by sowing the approaches with sharp-pointed bamboo stakes called wamisi in Garo, but better known as panjis. These presented a very formidable obstacle to an enemy, and effectually prevented a sudden attack. Nowadays, when every man is at peace with his neighbour, the necessity no longer exists for large collections of houses, and the difficulty of finding sufficient land close to big villages for the support of their inhabitants, has resulted in their being broken up into small hamlets situated perhaps as much as four or five miles apart, which, however, in most cases, retain the name of the parent village. In order to distinguish them there is added to the name of each hamlet the name of its nokma, or headman.’
[2]
[1]: Playfair, Alan 1909. “Garos”, 92 [2]: Playfair, Alan 1909. “Garos”, 40 |
||||||
|
The following comments seem to apply to colonial forts rather than Akan settlements: "Towrson proceeded to Cape Coast Castle. The cape was then known as Cape Korea, and Don Juan, who had a large town up-country, was also the owner of Cape Coast town, which at this period consisted of not more than twenty houses, and was surrounded by a low fence made with reeds and tied with certain bark of trees."
[1]
[1]: Sarbah, John Mensah 1968. “Fanti National Constitution: A Short Treatise On The Constitution And Government Of The Fanti, Asanti, And Other Akan Tribes Of West Africa Together With A Brief Account Of The Discovery Of The Gold Coast By Portuguese Navigators, A Short Narration Of Early English Voyages, And A Study Of The Rise Of British Gold Coast Jurisdiction, Etc., Etc.”, 68 |
||||||
|
The sources reviewed so far make no mention of palisades.
|
||||||
|
[In this case, the building material was stone but the wall was glued together with sot, soil, earth. Most evidence comes from the late 12th century onward. However, it is probable that the data is valid from 930 CE onward. There is evidence of several fortresses and fortified manors. But most or all forts seem to be dry-stone walled (sod probably used between stones). Timber for palisades would have to be imported and thus very expensive and probably less functional than dry-stone walls.]
|
||||||
|
[In this case, the building material was stone but the wall was glued together with sot, soil, earth. Most evidence comes from the late 12th century onward. However, it is probable that the data is valid from 930 CE onward. There is evidence of several fortresses and fortified manors. But most or all forts seem to be dry-stone walled (sod probably used between stones). Timber for palisades would have to be imported and thus very expensive and probably less functional than dry-stone walls.]
|
||||||
|
Inferred lack of substantial circumvallation.
[1]
. The data for fortifications is inferred. Possehl states that before the Urban phase (i.e. 2600 BCE) for only 3 sites out of 463 Pre-Urban sites the archaeological evidence could potentially be interpreted as having some sort of substantial circumvallation.
[1]
.
[1]: (Gregory L. Possehl. ’Revolution in the Urban Revolution: The Emergence of Indus Urbanization’, Annual Review of Anthropology, vol. 19. (1990), p. 271) |
||||||
|
Inferred lack of substantial circumvallation.
[1]
. The data for fortifications is inferred. Possehl states that before the Urban phase (i.e. 2600 BCE) for only 3 sites out of 463 Pre-Urban sites the archaeological evidence could potentially be interpreted as having some sort of substantial circumvallation.
[1]
.
[1]: (Gregory L. Possehl. ’Revolution in the Urban Revolution: The Emergence of Indus Urbanization’, Annual Review of Anthropology, vol. 19. (1990), p. 271) |
||||||
|
Inferred lack of substantial circumvallation.
[1]
The data for fortifications is inferred. Possehl states that before the Urban phase (i.e. 2600 BCE) for only 3 sites out of 463 Pre-Urban sites the archaeological evidence could potentially be interpreted as having some sort of substantial circumvallation.
[1]
[1]: (Gregory L. Possehl. ’Revolution in the Urban Revolution: The Emergence of Indus Urbanization’, Annual Review of Anthropology, vol. 19. (1990), p. 271) |
||||||
|
Inferred lack of substantial circumvallation.
[1]
The data for fortifications is inferred. Possehl states that before the Urban phase (i.e. 2600 BCE) for only 3 sites out of 463 Pre-Urban sites the archaeological evidence could potentially be interpreted as having some sort of substantial circumvallation.
[1]
[1]: (Gregory L. Possehl. ’Revolution in the Urban Revolution: The Emergence of Indus Urbanization’, Annual Review of Anthropology, vol. 19. (1990), p. 271) |
||||||
|
"The dismissal of city walls as defensive structures and the identification of the architecture on the ‘citadel’ mound at Mohenjo Daro as connected with ritual and public use rather than royal or defensive use are also arguably influenced by the acceptance of a warless society and elite."
[1]
[1]: Cork, E. (2005) Peaceful Harappans? Reviewing the evidence for the absence of warfare in the Indus Civilisation of north-west India and Pakistan (c. 2500-1900 BC). Antiquity (79): 411-423. p413 |
||||||
|
"The dismissal of city walls as defensive structures and the identification of the architecture on the ‘citadel’ mound at Mohenjo Daro as connected with ritual and public use rather than royal or defensive use are also arguably influenced by the acceptance of a warless society and elite."
[1]
[1]: Cork, E. (2005) Peaceful Harappans? Reviewing the evidence for the absence of warfare in the Indus Civilisation of north-west India and Pakistan (c. 2500-1900 BC). Antiquity (79): 411-423. p413 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Mud brick palisades protected both private dwellings and larger communities. The lands conquered by the Durrani empire had long traditions of fortifications and modern fortifications were present in the Sind and Persia.
[1]
[1]: Roy, Kaushik. War, Culture and Society in Early Modern South Asia, 1740-1849. Taylor & Francis, 2011. pp. 37-45 |
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
Wooden stakes were used to outline rice fields. A long, surrounding ditch has been identified as either a water supply system or a defensive moat.
[1]
Chinese texts (3rd century CE) refer to defensive stockades.
[2]
[1]: J. Edward Kidder, Jr., ‘The earliest societies in Japan’, in Delmer M. Brown The Cambridge History of Japan, Cambrudge: Cambridge University Press, 1993, p. 85 [2]: (Barnes 2007, 98) Gina L Barnes. 2007. State Formation in Japan: Emergence of a 4th-Century Ruling Elite. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
Wooden stakes were used to outline rice fields. A long, surrounding ditch has been identified as either a water supply system or a defensive moat.
[1]
Chinese texts (3rd century CE) refer to defensive stockades.
[2]
[1]: J. Edward Kidder, Jr., ‘The earliest societies in Japan’, in Delmer M. Brown The Cambridge History of Japan, Cambrudge: Cambridge University Press, 1993, p. 85 [2]: (Barnes 2007, 98) Gina L Barnes. 2007. State Formation in Japan: Emergence of a 4th-Century Ruling Elite. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
Don’t have enough of the text to provide context but there is a reference for Kofun period palisades here.
[1]
Chinese texts (3rd century CE) refer to stockades.
[2]
[1]: (Barnes 1988, 245) Gina Lee Barnes. 1988. Protohistoric Yamato: archaeology of the first Japanese state. Issue 78. University of Michigan and the Center for Japanese Studies and the Museum of Anthropology. [2]: (Barnes 2007, 98) Gina L Barnes. 2007. State Formation in Japan: Emergence of a 4th-Century Ruling Elite. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
Typical defenses included a rampart, a ditch, and a palisade
[1]
"Unlike the walled towns of China and Korea, fortified places in Japan tended to be isolated military outposts. These yamashiro (mountain castles) were hilltop fortresses consisting only of wooden stockades, gates and towers, joined to one another across valleys and peaks to form a complex defensive arrangement."
[2]
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.173. [2]: (Turnball 2002) Turnball, S. 2002. Siege Weapons of the Far East (1): AD 612-1300. Osprey Publishing. |
||||||
|
’Japanese penetration of the northeastern part of Honshu was marked by the establishment of forts (Jo) and palisades (saku) throughout the area as the line of colonization and conquest moved east and north.’
[1]
"These yamashiro (mountain castles) were hilltop fortresses consisting only of wooden stockades, gates and towers, joined to one another across valleys and peaks to form a complex defensive arrangement."
[2]
[1]: Shively, Donald H. and McCullough, William H. 2008. The Cambridge History of Japan Volume 2: Heian Japan. Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press.p.31 [2]: (Turnball 2002) Turnball, S. 2002. Siege Weapons of the Far East (1): AD 612-1300. Osprey Publishing. |
||||||
|
[1]
‘Descriptions in Taiheiki and other texts, and depictions of fortifications in fourteenth-century scroll paintings, indicate that fortresses of the period were architecturally similar to those of the early Kamakura era, albeit now fully enclosed and often reinforced with wooden palisades and additional yagura erected at various points along the walls between, as well as adjacent to, the gates.’
[2]
"These yamashiro (mountain castles) were hilltop fortresses consisting only of wooden stockades, gates and towers, joined to one another across valleys and peaks to form a complex defensive arrangement."
[3]
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press. p.173. [2]: Friday, Karl F. 2004. Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. Psychology Press.p.127. [3]: (Turnball 2002) Turnball, S. 2002. Siege Weapons of the Far East (1): AD 612-1300. Osprey Publishing. |
||||||
|
"Unlike the walled towns of China and Korea, fortified places in Japan tended to be isolated military outposts. These yamashiro (mountain castles) were hilltop fortresses consisting only of wooden stockades, gates and towers, joined to one another across valleys and peaks to form a complex defensive arrangement."
[1]
[1]: (Turnball 2002) Turnball, S. 2002. Siege Weapons of the Far East (1): AD 612-1300. Osprey Publishing. |
||||||
|
an example from the third siege of Nagashirma 1574CE ‘by the end of 1574 they were slowly starving to death. Instead of accepting surrender. Nobunaga commanded the erection of a very tall wooden palisade which was anchored on the forts of Nakae and Yanagashima.’
[1]
[1]: Turnbull, Stephen. 1998. The Samurai Sourcebook. Arms & Armour Press.p.224-225 |
||||||
|
"These various expedients--palisades, traces, traps and aeolian alarms--all contribute to the defence of a farm."
[1]
"He demanded that in return for his help, Unggang (Gerasi) should help him to fortify his own house first. A stockade was duly erected, traces of which are still visible."
[2]
"At first glance this appears to correspond to a dampa , but Freeman informs us that alangkau is a farm but or shed placed in immediate conjunction to the swidden and is a much flimsier structure, and abandoned much sooner. The risk of attack would have made it quite foolhardy to have an extensive dampasystem during the last century, especially in areas where “pacification” had not yet been undertaken. A dampa , having a much smaller number of people, would then be very vulnerable and it is possible that the furthest outlying farms were much closer to the main longhouse than is the case today, so that when the alarm was sounded to warn that an imminent attack might occur, there would have been a better chance for the people to reach the main longhouse, which could be more successfully defended. Stockades and other means of defence were probably also used by many more than the famous anti-government leader Rentap when he made his stand on the summit of Sadok Mountain."
[3]
[1]: Freeman 1955, 59 [2]: Sandin 1967, 85 [3]: Wagner, Ulla 1972. “Colonialism And Iban Warfare”, 85 |
||||||
|
These various expedients--palisades, traces, traps and aeolian alarms--all contribute to the defence of a farm
[1]
He demanded that in return for his help, Unggang (Gerasi) should help him to fortify his own house first. A stockade was duly erected, traces of which are still visible.
[2]
‘At first glance this appears to correspond to a dampa , but Freeman informs us that alangkau is a farm but or shed placed in immediate conjunction to the swidden and is a much flimsier structure, and abandoned much sooner. The risk of attack would have made it quite foolhardy to have an extensive dampasystem during the last century, especially in areas where “pacification” had not yet been undertaken. A dampa , having a much smaller number of people, would then be very vulnerable and it is possible that the furthest outlying farms were much closer to the main longhouse than is the case today, so that when the alarm was sounded to warn that an imminent attack might occur, there would have been a better chance for the people to reach the main longhouse, which could be more successfully defended. Stockades and other means of defence were probably also used by many more than the famous anti-government leader Rentap when he made his stand on the summit of Sadok Mountain.’
[3]
[1]: Freeman 1955, 59 [2]: Sandin 1967, 85 [3]: Wagner, Ulla 1972. “Colonialism And Iban Warfare”, 85 |
||||||
|
not yet found in settlements such as Göbekli Tepe
|
||||||
|
not yet found in settlements such as Çatal Höyük
|
||||||
|
not yet found in settlements such as Çatal Höyük
|
||||||
|
not yet found in settlements such as Çatal Höyük
|
||||||
|
not found in settlements
|
||||||
|
(e.g. Hattusa) The fortification walls were built in a casemate system with a width of up to 8 m. Two parallel walls were connected by diagonal walls, and the compartments thus constructed were filled with rubble. Towers protruded at regular intervals from the outer face of the walls. The walls are always situated on earthen ramparts, which provided protection against battering rams. As usual in Hittite architecture, the foundations and the lower parts of the walls were made of stone, whereas the upper parts consisted of a timber-framed structure of mud-brick. The superstructure of the walls can be reconstructed with a high degree of certainty thanks to the discovery of vessels showing fortification walls with battlements and towers. The gates were always flanked by towers. The Lion’s Gate in Hattusa was approached via a ramp, which ran parallel to the wall to the right, thus exposing the unshielded side of potential attackers to fire from the wall. Every gate could be closed on the outer and inner side by heavy wooden doors, which could be bolted with copper bars. A peculiarity of Hittite fortifications is the so-called postern, a narrow tunnel of up to 50 m in length and 3-4 m in width and height that led through the earthen ramparts on which the fortification stood. According to one theory, these posterns may have served as sally ports, enabling the defenders to make quick sorties. The length and the narrowness of the posterns made them easily defendable against intruders who, on the other hand, were exposed to fire from the fortification walls during their approach.
[1]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 141 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151 |
||||||
|
(e.g. Hattusa) The fortification walls were built in a casemate system with a width of up to 8 m. Two parallel walls were connected by diagonal walls, and the compartments thus constructed were filled with rubble. Towers protruded at regular intervals from the outer face of the walls. The walls are always situated on earthen ramparts, which provided protection against battering rams. As usual in Hittite architecture, the foundations and the lower parts of the walls were made of stone, whereas the upper parts consisted of a timber-framed structure of mud-brick. The superstructure of the walls can be reconstructed with a high degree of certainty thanks to the discovery of vessels showing fortification walls with battlements and towers. The gates were always flanked by towers. The Lion’s Gate in Hattusa was approached via a ramp, which ran parallel to the wall to the right, thus exposing the unshielded side of potential attackers to fire from the wall. Every gate could be closed on the outer and inner side by heavy wooden doors, which could be bolted with copper bars. A peculiarity of Hittite fortifications is the so-called postern, a narrow tunnel of up to 50 m in length and 3-4 m in width and height that led through the earthen ramparts on which the fortification stood. According to one theory, these posterns may have served as sally ports, enabling the defenders to make quick sorties. The length and the narrowness of the posterns made them easily defendable against intruders who, on the other hand, were exposed to fire from the fortification walls during their approach.
[1]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 141 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151 |
||||||
|
(e.g. Hattusa) The fortification walls were built in a casemate system with a width of up to 8 m. Two parallel walls were connected by diagonal walls, and the compartments thus constructed were filled with rubble. Towers protruded at regular intervals from the outer face of the walls. The walls are always situated on earthen ramparts, which provided protection against battering rams. As usual in Hittite architecture, the foundations and the lower parts of the walls were made of stone, whereas the upper parts consisted of a timber-framed structure of mud-brick. The superstructure of the walls can be reconstructed with a high degree of certainty thanks to the discovery of vessels showing fortification walls with battlements and towers. The gates were always flanked by towers. The Lion’s Gate in Hattusa was approached via a ramp, which ran parallel to the wall to the right, thus exposing the unshielded side of potential attackers to fire from the wall. Every gate could be closed on the outer and inner side by heavy wooden doors, which could be bolted with copper bars. A peculiarity of Hittite fortifications is the so-called postern, a narrow tunnel of up to 50 m in length and 3-4 m in width and height that led through the earthen ramparts on which the fortification stood. According to one theory, these posterns may have served as sally ports, enabling the defenders to make quick sorties. The length and the narrowness of the posterns made them easily defendable against intruders who, on the other hand, were exposed to fire from the fortification walls during their approach.
[1]
[1]: Lorenz J. and I. Schrakamp (2011) Hittite Military and Warfare, pp. 141 [In:] H. Genz and D. P. Mielke (ed.) Insights Into Hittite History And Archaeology, Colloquia Antiqua 2, Leuven, Paris, Walpole MA: PEETERS, pp. 125-151 |
||||||
|
’this fortification system arrangement remained unchanged throughout the imperial Hittite and Neo-Hittite periods’
[1]
[1]: Marcella Frangipane, ‘Arslantepe-Malatya: A Prehistoric and Early Historic Center in Eastern Anatolia’, The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), Edited by Gregory McMahon and Sharon Steadman, 2011, p. 985 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
not mentioned in literature
|
||||||
|
not mentioned in literature
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Middle Bronze Age at lake Albano: "series of wooden palisades were recently excavated on the lakeshore, which form the tangible remains of the Bronze Age settlement."
[1]
[1]: (Attema, Burgers and van Leusen 2010, 44) Peter A J Attema. Gert-Jan L M Burgers. Martijn van Leusen. 2010. Regional Pathways to Complexity: Settlement and Land-use Dynamics in Early Italy from the Bronze Age to the Republican Period. Amsterdam University Press. Amsterdam. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
General reference for Western Europe 11th and 12th centuries CE: fortifications typically consisted of earth ramparts and timber palisades which were generally surrounded by dry ditches (rather than water-filled for a moat). In the early 12th century CE stone began to replace earth-and-timber defences for walls and for castles (previously often wooden).
[1]
"Prefect Longinus about 570 built a ’fence in the form of a wall’ to protect Caesarea, the region between Ravenna and Casse. This may have been a stake and ditch palisade, a type of fortification known elsewhere in Italy at the time, and is assumed to have been made in response to Lombard aggression."
[2]
[1]: (Jones 1999, 171-172) Richard L C Jones. Fortifications and Sieges in Western Europe, c.800-1450. Maurice Keen. ed. 1999. Medieval Warfare: A History. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [2]: (Deliyannis 2010, 206) Deliyannis, Deborah Mauskopf. 2010. Ravenna in Late Antiquity. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. |
||||||
|
General reference for Western Europe 11th and 12th centuries CE: fortifications typically consisted of earth ramparts and timber palisades which were generally surrounded by dry ditches (rather than water-filled for a moat). In the early 12th century CE stone began to replace earth-and-timber defences for walls and for castles (previously often wooden).
[1]
Since palisades are a very ancient form of fortification we could code inferred present for the period earlier than the 12th century (when it is known they were still used).
[1]: (Jones 1999, 171-172) Richard L C Jones. Fortifications and Sieges in Western Europe, c.800-1450. Maurice Keen. ed. 1999. Medieval Warfare: A History. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
General reference for Western Europe 11th and 12th centuries CE: fortifications typically consisted of earth ramparts and timber palisades which were generally surrounded by dry ditches (rather than water-filled for a moat). In the early 12th century CE stone began to replace earth-and-timber defences for walls and for castles (previously often wooden).
[1]
[1]: (Jones 1999, 171-172) Richard L C Jones. Fortifications and Sieges in Western Europe, c.800-1450. Maurice Keen. ed. 1999. Medieval Warfare: A History. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Walls are mentioned (only) in the following source, but the building material used is not: "When speaking of structures, we should also mention the fact that in the old days the Yakuts knew how to make fortifications or ostrozhki, as they were called in the Russian texts of the 17th century. For example, in 1636-1637, during the campaign against the Kangalastsy, the Russian Cossacks found that “they had built strong forts with two walls covered with gravel, and surrounded by snow and water;” it was only after a two-day assault that the Cossacks managed to take one of these forts. In 1642 the Russians also took a Yakut fortress after great difficulty: “. . . the fort was made with two walls, the space between the walls was filled with earth, and there were log towers.” At a later stage these fortifications disappeared, and no one has described them since in detail. But even in the 19th century it was possible to find special tower-like barns here and there, which belonged to the Toyons."
[1]
We have assumed earth ramparts rather than wooden palisades in congruence with the evidence presented below.
[1]: Tokarev, S. A., and Gurvich I. S. 1964. “Yakuts.” Peoples Of Siberia, 265 |
||||||
|
Walls are mentioned (only) in the following source, but the building material used is not: "When speaking of structures, we should also mention the fact that in the old days the Yakuts knew how to make fortifications or ostrozhki, as they were called in the Russian texts of the 17th century. For example, in 1636-1637, during the campaign against the Kangalastsy, the Russian Cossacks found that “they had built strong forts with two walls covered with gravel, and surrounded by snow and water;” it was only after a two-day assault that the Cossacks managed to take one of these forts. In 1642 the Russians also took a Yakut fortress after great difficulty: “. . . the fort was made with two walls, the space between the walls was filled with earth, and there were log towers.” At a later stage these fortifications disappeared, and no one has described them since in detail. But even in the 19th century it was possible to find special tower-like barns here and there, which belonged to the Toyons."
[1]
We have assumed earth ramparts rather than wooden palisades in congruence with the evidence presented below.
[1]: Tokarev, S. A., and Gurvich I. S. 1964. “Yakuts.” Peoples Of Siberia, 265 |
||||||
|
’If a jivaría has reason to suspect that an attack is impending a palisade of balsa logs is set up around the house with small loopholes here and there between the posts to serve for observation and to shoot through. The walls of the house itself are reinforced on the inside with posts about 5 feet high.
[1]
’When we arrived in the community of Santü and Bupátä several weeks after the Tsimu killing, both males were fortifying the settlement against an anticipated revenge attack. Walls of palm slats were already up around each wooden bed platform in the normally wall-less houses. Furthermore, the settlement clearing in which their two houses stood was slowly being encircled by a defensive palisade, or wínUkü, roughly 2½ m high, which immediately identifies a settlement presently or recently at war.’
[2]
[1]: Stirling, Matthew Williams. 1938. “Historical And Ethnographical Material On The Jivaro Indians.” [2]: Bennett Ross, Jane. 1984. “Effects Of Contact On Revenge Hostilities Among The Achuará Jívaro.”, 103 |
||||||
|
"If a jivaría has reason to suspect that an attack is impending a palisade of balsa logs is set up around the house with small loopholes here and there between the posts to serve for observation and to shoot through. The walls of the house itself are reinforced on the inside with posts about 5 feet high."
[1]
"When we arrived in the community of Santü and Bupátä several weeks after the Tsimu killing, both males were fortifying the settlement against an anticipated revenge attack. Walls of palm slats were already up around each wooden bed platform in the normally wall-less houses. Furthermore, the settlement clearing in which their two houses stood was slowly being encircled by a defensive palisade, or wínUkü, roughly 2½ m high, which immediately identifies a settlement presently or recently at war."
[2]
[1]: Stirling, Matthew Williams. 1938. “Historical And Ethnographical Material On The Jivaro Indians.” [2]: Bennett Ross, Jane. 1984. “Effects Of Contact On Revenge Hostilities Among The Achuará Jívaro.”, 103 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Was enough timber available in Egypt to make wooden palisades a realistic option for a fortification system?
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"The Aksumites included timber among their building materials."
[1]
So there was timber available for constructing palisades if they had chosen to do so.
[1]: (Anfray 1981, 370) F Anfray. The civilization of Aksum from the first to the seventh century. G Mokhtar. ed. 1981, General History of Africa II. Ancient Civilizations of Africa. Heinemann. UNESCO. California. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"Late Paleolithic Chinese roamed the grasslands of the great Northern Plain, gathering wild varieties of millet. Around 7000-6000 B.C.E. they began creating a village culture along the Yellow River, elevating their villages above the floodplain, often enclosing them with ditches or wooden palisades."
[1]
Archaeological evidence is not mentioned and may not exist. This may be reasonable speculation. By the time of the Shang period lesser settlements may have been palisaded.
[1]: (Adler and Pouwels 2018, 54-55) Philip J Adler. Randall L Pouwels. 2018. World Civilizations. Eighth Edition. Cengage Learning. Boston. |
||||||
|
passing reference to a Chinese pictogram. unlikely to be preserved.
|
||||||
|
"Next to some chidao were also built yongdao (palisaded roads), which were reserved for the emperor and his relatives."
[1]
A palisaded road is not really a fortification. Inferred that palisades would also be used in various instances as minor form of fortification, such as for some small towns.
[1]: (Nyland 2015, 128) Michael Nyland. Supplying The Capital With Water And Food. Michael Nylan. ed. 2015. Chang’an 26 BCE: An Augustan Age in China. University of Washington Press. Seattle. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Present for previous polities.
|
||||||
|
Present for previous polities.
|
||||||
|
’Typical defenses included a rampart, a ditch, and a palisade.’
[1]
’Up to the beginning of the feudal era, three forms of fortifications were built, according to archaeologists. The grid-pattern city form was inspired by Chinese planning precedents, and included gates or walled enclosures. Mountain fortresses appear to be an indigenous form, and were typical of remote areas. Plateaus or plains often utilized the palisade, a semi-permanent defense. Typical defenses included a rampart, a ditch, and a palisade. Grid-pattern cities were surrounded by walls that served as a demarcation point rather than as true protection, and eventually such barriers disappeared. Remains of mountain fortresses found in northern Kyushu were a more effective means of protection, and may have belonged to ancient kingdoms that ruled parts of Japan in early times. Palisades were often constructed in the northeastern areas of the main island of Honshu. Although excavations have revealed only partial remains of such structures, they are significant since they offer prototypes for medieval fortifications.’
[1]
"Unlike the walled towns of China and Korea, fortified places in Japan tended to be isolated military outposts. These yamashiro (mountain castles) were hilltop fortresses consisting only of wooden stockades, gates and towers, joined to one another across valleys and peaks to form a complex defensive arrangement. With no stone or mudbrick walls to batter down, these castles were almost always overcome by infantry assault, often supported by arson attacks launched by fire arrows."
[2]
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.173. [2]: (Turnball 2002) Turnball, S. 2002. Siege Weapons of the Far East (1): AD 612-1300. Osprey Publishing. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"We know for certain that the Khitans tried to prevent the trade and tributary relations of their Jurchen vassals with the Sung. In 991 they cut off the land route by building palisades near a place through which travelers from Manchuria had to pass. But Sung-Jurchen relations continued by the sea route until the beginning of the eleventh century."
[1]
[1]: (Franke 1994, 219) Herbert Franke. The Chin dynasty. Herbert Franke. Denis Twitchett. eds. 1994. The Cambridge History of China: Volume 6, Alien Regimes and Border States, 907-1368. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
General reference for Western Europe 11th and 12th centuries CE: fortifications typically consisted of earth ramparts and timber palisades which were generally surrounded by dry ditches (rather than water-filled for a moat). In the early 12th century CE stone began to replace earth-and-timber defences for walls and for castles (previously often wooden).
[1]
Since palisades are a very ancient form of fortification we could code inferred present for the period earlier than the 12th century (when it is known they were still used).
[1]: (Jones 1999, 171-172) Richard L C Jones. Fortifications and Sieges in Western Europe, c.800-1450. Maurice Keen. ed. 1999. Medieval Warfare: A History. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
General reference for Western Europe 11th and 12th centuries CE: fortifications typically consisted of earth ramparts and timber palisades which were generally surrounded by dry ditches (rather than water-filled for a moat). In the early 12th century CE stone began to replace earth-and-timber defences for walls and for castles (previously often wooden).
[1]
Since palisades are a very ancient form of fortification we could code inferred present for the period earlier than the 12th century (when it is known they were still used).
[1]: (Jones 1999, 171-172) Richard L C Jones. Fortifications and Sieges in Western Europe, c.800-1450. Maurice Keen. ed. 1999. Medieval Warfare: A History. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
General reference for Western Europe 11th and 12th centuries CE: fortifications typically consisted of earth ramparts and timber palisades which were generally surrounded by dry ditches (rather than water-filled for a moat). In the early 12th century CE stone began to replace earth-and-timber defences for walls and for castles (previously often wooden).
[1]
Since palisades are a very ancient form of fortification we could code inferred present for the period earlier than the 12th century (when it is known they were still used). David Baker says present.
[2]
[1]: (Jones 1999, 171-172) Richard L C Jones. Fortifications and Sieges in Western Europe, c.800-1450. Maurice Keen. ed. 1999. Medieval Warfare: A History. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [2]: David Baker. Personal communication to Seshat Databank. |
||||||
|
General reference for Western Europe 11th and 12th centuries CE: fortifications typically consisted of earth ramparts and timber palisades which were generally surrounded by dry ditches (rather than water-filled for a moat). In the early 12th century CE stone began to replace earth-and-timber defences for walls and for castles (previously often wooden).
[1]
Since palisades are a very ancient form of fortification we could code inferred present for the period earlier than the 12th century (when it is known they were still used). David Baker says present.
[2]
[1]: (Jones 1999, 171-172) Richard L C Jones. Fortifications and Sieges in Western Europe, c.800-1450. Maurice Keen. ed. 1999. Medieval Warfare: A History. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [2]: David Baker. Personal communication to Seshat Databank. |
||||||
|
"Castle architecture became increasingly complex from the 12th to 13th centuries. ... All of these precautions became obsolete with the widespread use of gunpowder in the 14th and 15th centuries, and castles became simply country residences for the nobility."
[1]
[1]: (Jesse 1995, 181) Scott Jesse. Castles. William W Kibler. Grover A Zinn. Lawrence Earp. John Bell Henneman Jr. 1995. Routledge Revivals: Medieval France (1995): An Encyclopedia. Routledge. Abingdon. |
||||||
|
Present in previous and subsequent polities.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Code inferred from Abbasid Caliphate
[1]
which occupied Yemen between 751-868 CE.
[1]: Hugh N Kennedy. 2001. The Armies of the Caliphs: Military and Society in the Early Islamic State. Routledge. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/SGPPFNAZ/q/kennedy |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Code inferred from Abbasid Caliphate
[1]
which occupied Yemen between 751-868 CE.
[1]: Hugh N Kennedy. 2001. The Armies of the Caliphs: Military and Society in the Early Islamic State. Routledge. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/SGPPFNAZ/q/kennedy |
||||||
|
References exist for Crusaders building palisades. "The ships moored in the cove of al-Markab, and their crews showered missiles on the Ayyubid army, which was only able to continue its northward march with the protection of a veritable palisade erected along the sea-shore, as described by Imad al-Din al-Isfahani... ."
[1]
[1]: (Gibb 579, 1954) Hamilton Alexander Rosskeen Gibb. 1954. The Encyclopaedia of Islam. Volume 6. BRILL. Leiden. Note: not sure if that is one name or two separate names. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Evidence for fortifications is not discussed in the literature.
[1]
[1]: Burjor Avari, India: The Ancient Past: a History of the Indian Sub-continent from c. 7000 BC to AD 1200 (London: Routledge, 2007); Upinder Singh, A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century (New Delhi: Pearson Education, 2008) |
||||||
|
Inferred from the preceding Mauryans: According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): at this time in India fortifications were mostly made of wood. According to Megasthenes the Mauryan capital was protected by a wooden wall.
[1]
Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.; Kautilya’s Arthashastra discourages use of timber for walls, although timber was used at Pataliputra (period not stated).
[2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [2]: (Allchin 1995, 223) F R Allchin. 1995. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. |
||||||
|
Cannot find any data other than passing references to city walls and that the later Guptas didn’t build enough fortifications. The Guptas held a vast territory (where resources available differed greatly from one place to the next) so one could infer this included cities which already had stone walls, earth ramparts, moats and ditches, and palisades.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"Late Paleolithic Chinese roamed the grasslands of the great Northern Plain, gathering wild varieties of millet. Around 7000-6000 B.C.E. they began creating a village culture along the Yellow River, elevating their villages above the floodplain, often enclosing them with ditches or wooden palisades."
[1]
[1]: (Adler and Pouwels 2018, 54-55) Philip J Adler. Randall L Pouwels. 2018. World Civilizations. Eighth Edition. Cengage Learning. Boston. |
||||||
|
"Late Paleolithic Chinese roamed the grasslands of the great Northern Plain, gathering wild varieties of millet. Around 7000-6000 B.C.E. they began creating a village culture along the Yellow River, elevating their villages above the floodplain, often enclosing them with ditches or wooden palisades."
[1]
[1]: (Adler and Pouwels 2018, 54-55) Philip J Adler. Randall L Pouwels. 2018. World Civilizations. Eighth Edition. Cengage Learning. Boston. |
||||||
|
Earthen walls used. Wooden walls not impossible but these less likely to leave archaeological record, unless very substantial (post holes).
|
||||||
|
Earthen walls used. Wooden walls not impossible but these less likely to leave archaeological record, unless very substantial (post holes).
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Natural "elm palisade." "To defend itself in the face of escalating territorial threat, the Song government constructed a series of connected ponds and lakes (called tangbo) running from Baozhou (present day Baoding) in the west to Cangzhou in the east. The administrative centre or zhisuo of Song dynasty Cangzhou was in present day Cangxian county, Hebei province. The network of lakes was designed to thwart the Liao cavalry, against whom the Song also had recourse to primitive non-explosive landmines and spiked obstacles named for their shape ’puncture vines’ (jili or Tribulus terrestris). The lines of natural and man-made lakes were unfortunately seasonal and they either froze over in winter, enabling the Khitan horsemen to cross, or they dried up in the late autumn or early spring. The lakes were therefore supplemented by a dense network of trees, which were called ’the elm palisades’ (yusai). The extent to which the Chinese or lacework elm (Ulmus parvifolia), as opposed to other varieties of trees, was planted to form the palisades cannot be ascertained from the brief historical records of this defensive experiment in reforestation."
[1]
[1]: (The Elm Tree Palisade 2006). 2006. "The Elm Tree Palisades: The Great Wall of the Northern Song." China Heritage Project: Australian National University, 6. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Reference for pre-colonial African warfare: in the 16th century the Kano people used stockades. There are other/later examples of palisades.
[1]
Reference for pre-colonial African warfare: "stockades (or palisades) were perhaps nearly as common, sometimes combined with walls, sometimes as the main defence."
[1]
[1]: (Smith 1989, 100) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. |
||||||
|
Reference for pre-colonial African warfare: in the 16th century the Kano people used stockades. There are other/later examples of palisades.
[1]
Reference for pre-colonial African warfare: "stockades (or palisades) were perhaps nearly as common, sometimes combined with walls, sometimes as the main defence."
[1]
[1]: (Smith 1989, 100) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. |
||||||
|
"Broad resemblances to archaeologically documented Muisca dwellings are also evident (see Boada 1998, Henderson and Ostler 2005), excepting the presence of palisades and fences surrounding ruler’s compounds which are completely absent among the Tairona."
[1]
Simon mentions palisades in Bonda, made of coarse and thick wood. "Simón menciona de Bonda palizadas: "de leños gruesos y muy espesos" (32, V, 212)"
[2]
Pueblito: "It is also important to note that, in contradistinction to other pre-Hispanic groups of the Northern Andes contemporaneous with the Tairona, such as the better known Muisca of the Eastern Highlands (Boada 1998, Henderson and Ostler 2005, Villate 2001) or even the Calima and Malagana societies of the Cauca Valley (Cardale de Schrimpff and Bray 2005), the town itself, its plazas and their attendant structures were not enclosed at any time through palisades, fortifications, narrow corridors or other physical means used to restrict access and circulation."
[3]
[1]: (Giraldo 2010, 30-1) [2]: (Reichel-Dolmatoff 1951, 80) [3]: (Giraldo 2010, 207) |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
’It seems that in certain cases at least the village was provided with some kind of stockade, though no trace of these defences remains to-day.’
[1]
’In former times, if native accounts are to be trusted, villages were more extensive through need of mutual protection against the raider; and a resident magistrate patrolling the river Gira in 1901 speaks of a village 200 yards long by two chains broad, which contained seventy-one houses and was ‘barricaded in with a look-out and fighting platforms on the stockade’. But nowadays [1923] pacification has brought about a tendency to scatter in small isolated groups.’
[2]
’Norton (1962:6) says that sometimes villages, which ‘are known to have been quite large’ and stockaded (cf. Williams 1930:67, 164-6), were separated by tracts of unclaimed virgin land until the time of the suppression of feuding.’
[3]
’That warfare was a constant in precontact Orokaivan life is also borne out by descriptions of material defence arrangements. Villages along the Kumusi, Ope, Mambare and Gira rivers, in particular, were reported to be stockaded in many cases and several had lookout platforms in large trees. In 1906 the Resident Magistrate reported fighting in the Kumusi area in which 102 houses, including several tree-houses, were burned.’
[4]
[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 166 [2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 68 [3]: Rimoldi, Max, Cromwell Burau, and Robert Ferraris 1966. “Land Tenure And Land Use Among The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 36 [4]: Newton, Janice. 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production.”, 488 |
||||||
|
It seems that in certain cases at least the village was provided with some kind of stockade, though no trace of these defences remains to-day.
[1]
In former times, if native accounts are to be trusted, villages were more extensive through need of mutual protection against the raider; and a resident magistrate patrolling the river Gira in 1901 speaks of a village 200 yards long by two chains broad, which contained seventy-one houses and was ‘barricaded in with a look-out and fighting platforms on the stockade’. But nowadays [1923] pacification has brought about a tendency to scatter in small isolated groups.
[2]
Norton (1962:6) says that sometimes villages, which ‘are known to have been quite large’ and stockaded (cf. Williams 1930:67, 164-6), were separated by tracts of unclaimed virgin land until the time of the suppression of feuding.
[3]
That warfare was a constant in precontact Orokaivan life is also borne out by descriptions of material defence arrangements. Villages along the Kumusi, Ope, Mambare and Gira rivers, in particular, were reported to be stockaded in many cases and several had lookout platforms in large trees. In 1906 the Resident Magistrate reported fighting in the Kumusi area in which 102 houses, including several tree-houses, were burned.
[4]
[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 166 [2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 68 [3]: Rimoldi, Max, Cromwell Burau, and Robert Ferraris 1966. “Land Tenure And Land Use Among The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 36 [4]: Newton, Janice. 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production.”, 488 |
||||||
|
It seems that in certain cases at least the village was provided with some kind of stockade, though no trace of these defences remains to-day.
[1]
In former times, if native accounts are to be trusted, villages were more extensive through need of mutual protection against the raider; and a resident magistrate patrolling the river Gira in 1901 speaks of a village 200 yards long by two chains broad, which contained seventy-one houses and was ‘barricaded in with a look-out and fighting platforms on the stockade’. But nowadays [1923] pacification has brought about a tendency to scatter in small isolated groups.
[2]
Norton (1962:6) says that sometimes villages, which ‘are known to have been quite large’ and stockaded (cf. Williams 1930:67, 164-6), were separated by tracts of unclaimed virgin land until the time of the suppression of feuding.
[3]
That warfare was a constant in precontact Orokaivan life is also borne out by descriptions of material defence arrangements. Villages along the Kumusi, Ope, Mambare and Gira rivers, in particular, were reported to be stockaded in many cases and several had lookout platforms in large trees. In 1906 the Resident Magistrate reported fighting in the Kumusi area in which 102 houses, including several tree-houses, were burned.
[4]
[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 166 [2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 68 [3]: Rimoldi, Max, Cromwell Burau, and Robert Ferraris 1966. “Land Tenure And Land Use Among The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 36 [4]: Newton, Janice. 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production.”, 488 |
||||||
|
It seems that in certain cases at least the village was provided with some kind of stockade, though no trace of these defences remains to-day.
[1]
In former times, if native accounts are to be trusted, villages were more extensive through need of mutual protection against the raider; and a resident magistrate patrolling the river Gira in 1901 speaks of a village 200 yards long by two chains broad, which contained seventy-one houses and was ‘barricaded in with a look-out and fighting platforms on the stockade’. But nowadays [1923] pacification has brought about a tendency to scatter in small isolated groups.
[2]
Norton (1962:6) says that sometimes villages, which ‘are known to have been quite large’ and stockaded (cf. Williams 1930:67, 164-6), were separated by tracts of unclaimed virgin land until the time of the suppression of feuding.
[3]
That warfare was a constant in precontact Orokaivan life is also borne out by descriptions of material defence arrangements. Villages along the Kumusi, Ope, Mambare and Gira rivers, in particular, were reported to be stockaded in many cases and several had lookout platforms in large trees. In 1906 the Resident Magistrate reported fighting in the Kumusi area in which 102 houses, including several tree-houses, were burned.
[4]
[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 166 [2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 68 [3]: Rimoldi, Max, Cromwell Burau, and Robert Ferraris 1966. “Land Tenure And Land Use Among The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 36 [4]: Newton, Janice. 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production.”, 488 |
||||||
|
It seems that in certain cases at least the village was provided with some kind of stockade, though no trace of these defences remains to-day.
[1]
In former times, if native accounts are to be trusted, villages were more extensive through need of mutual protection against the raider; and a resident magistrate patrolling the river Gira in 1901 speaks of a village 200 yards long by two chains broad, which contained seventy-one houses and was ‘barricaded in with a look-out and fighting platforms on the stockade’. But nowadays [1923] pacification has brought about a tendency to scatter in small isolated groups.
[2]
Norton (1962:6) says that sometimes villages, which ‘are known to have been quite large’ and stockaded (cf. Williams 1930:67, 164-6), were separated by tracts of unclaimed virgin land until the time of the suppression of feuding.
[3]
That warfare was a constant in precontact Orokaivan life is also borne out by descriptions of material defence arrangements. Villages along the Kumusi, Ope, Mambare and Gira rivers, in particular, were reported to be stockaded in many cases and several had lookout platforms in large trees. In 1906 the Resident Magistrate reported fighting in the Kumusi area in which 102 houses, including several tree-houses, were burned.
[4]
[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 166 [2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 68 [3]: Rimoldi, Max, Cromwell Burau, and Robert Ferraris 1966. “Land Tenure And Land Use Among The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 36 [4]: Newton, Janice. 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production.”, 488 |
||||||
|
"Hill forts were common throughout much of central and western Europe in the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age..." France is mentioned in text no earlier than a sixth century BCE context. "In Scotland and northern Wales the earliest forts were built in the Late Bronze Age with timber palisades constructed on hilltop sites from ca. the eighth century BC onwards".
[1]
Text is not conclusive. Data for Mediterranean France: "Massive defensive ramparts that have left archaeological traces were extremely rare throughout Mediterranean France during the period immediately preceding the colonial encounter. One cannot rule out the possible presence of wooden palisades surrounding settlements, although these have yet to be detected."
[2]
[1]: (Champion and Karl 2012, 666) Timothy Champion. Raimund Karl. Hill Forts. Neil Asher Silberman. ed. 2012. The Oxford Companion to Archaeology, Volume 1. Second Edition. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [2]: (Dietler 2010, 169) Michael Dietler. 2010. Archaeologies of Colonialism: Consumption, Entanglement, and Violence in Ancient Mediterranean France. University of California Press. Berkeley. |
||||||
|
Finds close to Paris Basin region.
[1]
[1]: (http://www.chronocarto.ens.fr/gcserver/atlas#) |
||||||
|
Finds close to Paris Basin region.
[1]
[1]: (http://www.chronocarto.ens.fr/gcserver/atlas#) |
||||||
|
Finds close to Paris Basin region.
[1]
[1]: (http://www.chronocarto.ens.fr/gcserver/atlas#) |
||||||
|
Present close to the Paris Basin region.
[1]
[1]: (http://www.chronocarto.ens.fr/gcserver/atlas#) |
||||||
|
General reference for Western Europe 11th and 12th centuries CE: fortifications typically consisted of earth ramparts and timber palisades which were generally surrounded by dry ditches (rather than water-filled for a moat). In the early 12th century CE stone began to replace earth-and-timber defences for walls and for castles (previously often wooden).
[1]
Since palisades are a very ancient form of fortification we could code inferred present for the period earlier than the 12th century (when it is known they were still used).
[1]: (Jones 1999, 171-172) Richard L C Jones. Fortifications and Sieges in Western Europe, c.800-1450. Maurice Keen. ed. 1999. Medieval Warfare: A History. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
A Bailey consists of a ditch with a wooden rampart. "In the 11th century, local rulers led in the construction of fortifications, at first small earth and wood motte-and-bailey castles, but soon larger and stronger structures of masonry."
[1]
Motte and bailey castles proliferated.
[2]
[1]: (DeVries in Kibler et al 1995, 1838) [2]: (Hallam and Everard 2014) Elizabeth M Hallam. Judith Everard. 2014. Capetian France 987-1328. Second Edition. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
A Bailey consists of a ditch with a wooden rampart. "In the 11th century, local rulers led in the construction of fortifications, at first small earth and wood motte-and-bailey castles, but soon larger and stronger structures of masonry."
[1]
Motte and bailey castles proliferated.
[2]
[1]: (DeVries in Kibler et al 1995, 1838) [2]: (Hallam and Everard 2014) Elizabeth M Hallam. Judith Everard. 2014. Capetian France 987-1328. Second Edition. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
Present in previous and subsequent periods.
|
||||||
|
Present in previous and subsequent polities. ’
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Sintashta culture is also in Central Asia (essentially follows the Sarazm 2100-1800 BCE) but I don’t think there is enough here to infer present as Sarazm was not between the northern steppe and the forest zone:"One of the signature innovations of the Sintashta culture was the appearance of heavily fortified permanent settlements, with ditches, banks, and substantial palisade walls, in the steppes southeast of the Urals, beginning a shift from mobile to settled pastoralism that was adopted soon afterward across the northern steppe zone both to the east and the west. The late 3rd milennium BC was a time of intensified conflict and intensified interchange between the people of the northern steppes and the forest zone. Conflict and competition for shrinking marsh resources essential for wintering-over pastoral herds probably led to the sedentarization of the formerly mobile pastoralists of the steppes."
[1]
[1]: (Anthony and Brown 2014, 66) David W Anthony. Dorcas R Brown. Horseback Riding and Bronze Age Pastoralism in the Eurasian Steppes. Victor H Mair. Jane Hickman. eds. 2014. Reconfiguring the Silk Road: New Research on East-West Exchange in Antiquity. University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. Philadelphia. |
||||||
|
The Andronovo settlement Chernoozerje on the Irtysh river was surrounded by a palisade.
[1]
Sintashta culture 2100-1800 BCE: "One of the signature innovations of the Sintashta culture was the appearance of heavily fortified permanent settlements, with ditches, banks, and substantial palisade walls, in the steppes southeast of the Urals, beginning a shift from mobile to settled pastoralism that was adopted soon afterward across the northern steppe zone both to the east and the west. The late 3rd milennium BC was a time of intensified conflict and intensified interchange between the people of the northern steppes and the forest zone. Conflict and competition for shrinking marsh resources essential for wintering-over pastoral herds probably led to the sedentarization of the formerly mobile pastoralists of the steppes."
[2]
[1]: (Kuz’mina 2007, 38) Elena Efimovna Kuzʹmina. 2007. The Origin of the Indo-Iranians. J P Mallory ed. BRILL. Leiden. [2]: (Anthony and Brown 2014, 66) David W Anthony. Dorcas R Brown. Horseback Riding and Bronze Age Pastoralism in the Eurasian Steppes. Victor H Mair. Jane Hickman. eds. 2014. Reconfiguring the Silk Road: New Research on East-West Exchange in Antiquity. University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. Philadelphia. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Andronovo culture (2000-900 BCE, Alakul phase 2100-1400 BCE, Fedorovo phase 1400-1200 BCE, Alekseyevka phase 1200-1000 BCE) had defensive fortifications such as pallisades, ditches and earth ramparts at many sites.
[1]
[1]: (Mallory 1997, 20-21) J P Mallory. Andronovo culture. J P Mallory. D Q Adams. eds. 1997. Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers. Chicago. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"In Samarkand of the third to fifth centuries, a wall separated the northern third of the city that was densely filled with houses from the other part of the huge area, which was only sparsely settled. Starting with the sixth century, houses of aristocrats were built between this wall and the ancient outer palisade."
[1]
[1]: Boris I Marshak. The Archaeology of Sogdiana. December 2003. The Silk Road. Volume 1. Number 2. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
’With Qing advances in 1795, the Miao would build fortications of an unspecified type quickly, presumably wooden palisades, earth ramparts, and ditches.’
[1]
[1]: SUTTON, D. S.. (2003). Ethnic Revolt in the Qing Empire: The "Miao Uprising" of 1795-1797 Reexamined. Asia Major, 16(2), 105-152. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41649879 |
||||||
|
’With Qing advances in 1795, the Miao would build fortifications of an unspecified type quickly, presumably wooden palisades, earth ramparts, and ditches.’
[1]
This presumably still applies for this period.
[1]: SUTTON, D. S.. (2003). Ethnic Revolt in the Qing Empire: The "Miao Uprising" of 1795-1797 Reexamined. Asia Major, 16(2), 105-152. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41649879 |
||||||
|
"As with the rest of the Near East, there is little evidence for warfare in Neolithic Mesopotamia."
[1]
[1]: (Hamblin 2006: 33) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
No evidence to code.
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture
[1]
[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56 |
||||||
|
‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture
[1]
[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56 |
||||||
|
‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture
[1]
[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56 |
||||||
|
‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture
[1]
[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56 |
||||||
|
‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture
[1]
[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56 |
||||||
|
‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture
[1]
[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56 |
||||||
|
‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture
[1]
[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56 |
||||||
|
‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture
[1]
[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56 |
||||||
|
‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture
[1]
[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56 |
||||||
|
‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture
[1]
[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56 |
||||||
|
‘early Neolithic settlements have proven difficult to document even in intensively surveyed regions.’ There is only evidence for mudbrick architecture
[1]
[1]: Lloyd R. Weeks, ‘The Development and Expansion of a Neolithic Way of Life’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 56 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
inferred absent due to lack of trees Egypt
|
||||||
|
due to lack of trees in Egypt
|
||||||
|
due to lack of trees in Egypt
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
[1]
[1]: (Adam 1981, 232) Adam, S. 1981. “The Importance of Nubia: A Link between Central Africa and the Mediterranean.” In General History of Africa II: Ancient Civilizations of Africa, edited by G. Mokhtar, II:226-44. General History of Africa. Paris: UNESCO. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/8APQDQV3. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
needs expert verification
|
||||||
|
A defensive palisade was present at San José Mogote during this period, as shown by two rows of post holes. The length of the wall is not known due to later disturbance of the remains.
[1]
[1]: Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2005). Excavations at San José Mogote 1: The Household Archaeology, University of Michigan Museum, p102 |
||||||
|
A defensive palisade was present at San José Mogote during this period, as shown by two rows of post holes. The length of the wall is not known due to later disturbance of the remains.
[1]
[1]: Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2005). Excavations at San José Mogote 1: The Household Archaeology, University of Michigan Museum, p102 |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
do not mention any archaeological evidence for fortification for this period.
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. |
||||||
|
Monte Albán was built with a 3km defensive wall along the shallower slopes of the hill, and wooden palisades may have been present.
[1]
[1]: Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804 |
||||||
|
Monte Albán was built with a 3km defensive wall along the shallower slopes of the hill, and wooden palisades may have been present.
[1]
[1]: Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804 |
||||||
|
Monte Albán was built with a 3km defensive wall along the shallower slopes of the hill, and wooden palisades may have been present.
[1]
[1]: Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804 |
||||||
|
Monte Albán was built with a 3km defensive wall along the shallower slopes of the hill, and wooden palisades may have been present.
[1]
[1]: Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804 |
||||||
|
Monte Albán was built with a 3km defensive wall along the shallower slopes of the hill, and wooden palisades may have been present.
[1]
[1]: Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804 |
||||||
|
Monte Albán was built with a 3km defensive wall along the shallower slopes of the hill, and wooden palisades may have been present.
[1]
[1]: Flannery, K. V. and J. Marcus (2003). "The origin of war: New C-14 dates from ancient Mexico." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(20): 11801-11805, p11804 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||