Timeline for What were the expectations of a medieval castle or fortress hoping to break or outlast a siege?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 25, 2017 at 4:42 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackHistory/status/934281122229473281 | ||
| Nov 23, 2017 at 0:12 | answer | added | tj1000 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Nov 21, 2017 at 21:45 | answer | added | Twelfth | timeline score: 0 | |
| Nov 18, 2017 at 1:22 | answer | added | Jos | timeline score: 0 | |
| Nov 17, 2017 at 23:54 | answer | added | Tom Au | timeline score: 2 | |
| Nov 1, 2017 at 22:59 | comment | added | TheHonRose | Related question - history.stackexchange.com/questions/14325/… | |
| Nov 1, 2017 at 20:52 | history | reopened |
Tom Au MCW♦ sempaiscuba KorvinStarmast justCal |
||
| Nov 1, 2017 at 17:28 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Nov 1, 2017 at 20:56 | |||||
| Nov 1, 2017 at 17:12 | comment | added | Tom Au | I am voting to reopen the question as edited. There was "conventional wisdom " in medieval western Europe of how sieges could be withstood. It's worth articulating that conventional wisdom. | |
| Nov 1, 2017 at 17:10 | history | edited | Tom Au | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body; edited title
|
| Jul 5, 2016 at 20:29 | history | closed |
Pieter Geerkens Anaryl Marakai David Hammen Tom Au |
Needs more focus | |
| Jul 5, 2016 at 18:03 | answer | added | Bruce James | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jul 5, 2016 at 17:21 | comment | added | Bruce James | There is an answer, although I'd have to plow through some old military journals for sources. The answer is: Why would anyone directly attack a fortress? The general rule of thumb for an armed invasion is 3-1 in troop strength; but even more troops are required if you are dealing with fortress-like situations, e.g. Iwo Jima. In the Pacific arena of WW2, avoiding Japanese fortresses was difficult for the Americans seeking to get within bomber range of Japan. But generally, if you can go around or over a fortress, military experts prefer that. | |
| Jul 4, 2016 at 15:31 | answer | added | Alex | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jul 3, 2016 at 23:04 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jul 5, 2016 at 20:33 | |||||
| Jul 3, 2016 at 20:15 | comment | added | Doctor Zhivago | Most Castles existed for the country folk to retreat to in case of "invader" so a lot would depend on the location of the Castle (preferably on a hill overlooking a River), how well built the Castle was, how well fortified it could be, how well it could still launch an attack from within to without, how economically sustainable it could be in times of peace, etc. | |
| Jul 3, 2016 at 17:46 | answer | added | D J Sims | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jul 3, 2016 at 17:45 | history | edited | rougon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added conditions to narrow the focus.
|
| Jul 3, 2016 at 16:31 | comment | added | rougon | Good points. Would it help to restrict it to Western Europe and England between 1100-1400? | |
| Jul 3, 2016 at 15:44 | comment | added | Steve Bird | A very broad question (covering many centuries and different cultures) so difficult to answer accurately. Also very dependant on the exact circumstances. For example, if you were the last defender against an invader or a rebel warlord surrounded by the King's forces then your prospects were different to being a loyal noble holding on until the King's army came to your relief. | |
| Jul 3, 2016 at 15:27 | history | edited | rougon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 104 characters in body
|
| Jul 3, 2016 at 14:27 | history | edited | rougon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Jul 3, 2016 at 13:50 | history | asked | rougon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |