DOCSLIB.ORG

A Methodological Reassessment of Greek and Roman Battlefield Archaeology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Methodological Reassessment of Greek and Roman Battlefield Archaeology Collecting the Field: A Methodological Reassessment of Greek and Roman Battlefield Archaeology. Thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements of the University of Liverpool for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy by Joanne Elizabeth Ball February 2016 Collecting the Field: A Methodological Reassessment of Greek and Roman Battlefield Archaeology. Joanne Elizabeth Ball. Abstract. The study of Greek and Roman battles has been an area of academic interest for centuries, but understanding of the archaeological potential of battlefields from classical antiquity has remained severely limited. The field has stagnated partly through over- deference to unsuitable ancient literary accounts, compounded by a lack of exploration of the site formation processes on such battlefields. This has resulted in an unjustified pessimism among some ancient historians and battlefield archaeologists that any significant information can be extracted from the exploration of such sites. Several ancient battlefields, and numerous smaller-scale conflict sites, have been identified and excavated in the previous three decades. In spite of these projects, there has been a general absence of integration of the evidence from these sites into a wider understanding of the archaeology of ancient battlefields, and consequently, a failure to use the evidence to identify and locate new sites. Drawing evidence from a number of excavated conflict sites from the classical world, particularly the Roman battlefields at Baecula, Kalkriese, and Harzhorn, this thesis presents an argument for a more archaeologically-dominated approach to exploring Greek and Roman battlefields, despite the pragmatic challenges in doing so. While the ancient literary sources have been the primary base for much of the last two centuries, they contain little reliable or accurate evidence with regards to geographic or topographic location of specific battlefields or the post-battle processing of battle-deposited material. This research has explored the site formation processes on ancient battlefields, working from excavated examples including those at Baecula, Kalkriese, and the Harzhorn, as well as other smaller- scale conflict sites and battle-related graves. This research has considered the issue of site formation on ancient battlefields with a particular focus on the impact of post-battle processes, looting and the disposal of the dead, on the archaeological assemblages. It concludes that while such processes had a significant impact on the assemblage deposited by battle, a significant number of artefacts were left behind. The ‘signature’ of ancient battle is composed of these artefacts – small projectiles, fragments of military kit, caligae nails, and coins – which when found in spatial conjunction, identify battlefield sites. This thesis suggests that archaeological methodologies developed for exploration of modern (C19th and later) battlefields can be modified for use on sites from antiquity, contributing to the identification of battlefield locations and reconstruction of battle-narratives. ii Acknowledgements It would not have been possible to even start writing this thesis, let alone finish it, without the support of so many people. Thanks go out to my comrades in research, including Peta Bulmer, Sam Cook, Shirley Curtis-Summers, Pablo Fernández, Joey Gaynor, Sally Hoare, Pete Norris, Kevin Stover, and Jonty Trigg. Overall, I think we have learned more in the AJ from each other than the time we have lost! Appreciation is also given to academic staff from the department, particularly Matthew Ponting, my second supervisor, and Michael Sommer, my initial second supervisor. Achim Rost and Susanne Wilbers-Rost deserve particular thanks for their kindness in sharing their insights from Kalkriese, and for their work in both exploring and publicising the site. Credit must go to Lawrence Babits for many conversations and emails on the American Civil War, and for letting me fire a Brown Bess musket without seriously endangering the life of anyone. For assistance at various stages of research, thanks also to Juan Bellón Ruiz, Jon Coulston, Thomas Fischer, Michael Meyer, Gordon Noble, and Steve Smith. I would also like to thank everyone I have met at the Fields of Conflict Conferences. Thanks are also due to Rachel Plummer for her support and sympathy, chocolate, and for letting me drag her to Towton battlefield to look at not very much at all... My family and work colleagues have provided much support over the last five years and I am unending grateful to them. Particular gratitude and love to my parents for their support, and to Lee who, from necessity, has become more informed about the archaeology of ancient battle - and the Varus disaster - than he ever thought possible. Lastly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Phil Freeman, for all his support in writing this thesis, going back almost a decade to a scared undergraduate thinking about writing a dissertation on the Varus Disaster. This research really could not have been finished without the guidance, critique, and effort which Phil has given it in the last 5 years, and I am immensely grateful to him for everything he has done, and continues to do. iii Contents Abstract......................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgments.................................................................................................... iii Contents........................................................................................................................ iv List of Figures............................................................................................................... x List of Tables................................................................................................................ xii List of abbreviations.................................................................................................. xiii Table summarising the principle battle sites noted in the text................. xiv Chapter One: Introduction and context 1.1: Question and aims..................................................................................................... 1 1.2: Thesis structure and organisation............................................................................. 3 1.3: Battlefield Archaeology............................................................................................. 6 1.3.1: Development of the discipline.................................................................... 11 1.3.2: Ancient battlefields in archaeology............................................................ 14 1.3.3: A brief historiography of ancient battlefield studies.................................. 18 1.4: Why ancient battlefields?.......................................................................................... 26 1.4.1: “Battle” in battlefield archaeology............................................................ 29 1.4.2: “Battle” in antiquity.................................................................................... 31 1.5: Excavated conflict sites from antiquity..................................................................... 36 1.6: Conclusion................................................................................................................. 41 iv Chapter Two: The Literary Record 2.1: Introduction............................................................................................................... 42 2.2: Battlefields in the ancient literary record................................................................. 45 2.2.1: Battlefields in ancient historical texts and commentaries........................ 47 2.2.2: Battlefields in ancient military treatises.................................................... 50 2.2.3: Battlefields in ancient biography............................................................... 51 2.2.4: The authors of battlefield texts.................................................................. 52 2.3: Battle narratives in ancient historical literature...................................................... 54 2.4: The sources of evidence for ancient battlefield narratives...................................... 57 2.4.1: Participant and eyewitness testimony........................................................ 57 2.4.2: The accuracy of participant and eyewitness testimony............................. 59 2.4.3: Campaign journals and military documentation....................................... 63 2.4.4: Earlier histories and epigraphy.................................................................. 65 2.5: The reliability of the ancient literature on battle-narrative..................................... 67 2.5.1: Deliberate simplification, alteration, and literary topoi............................ 69 2.6: The geography of battlefield location in antiquity.................................................... 71 2.6.1: Battlefield toponyms.................................................................................. 73 2.6.2: Etymology and toponymic-landscape reconciliation................................. 75 2.6.3: Geographic location without toponyms..................................................... 79 2.7: Battlefield topography in the ancient literary record............................................... 84 2.7.1: Battlefield terrain descriptions.................................................................. 85 2.7.2: The terrain of 'lost' battlefields...............................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • How Strong Was Strong Mountain? Preliminary Remarks on the Possible Location of the Mamluk Siege Position at Montfort Castle
    CHAPTER 26 How Strong was Strong Mountain? Preliminary Remarks on the Possible Location of the Mamluk Siege Position at Montfort Castle Rafael Lewis During a topographic and landscape archaeology sur- logical site to the broader landscape, including every vey, thoughts on Montfort Castle’s topographical infe- archaeological feature in it. The field methods used riority led to some preliminary1 ideas on the manner in Landscape Archaeology and the Archaeology of in which the Teutonic Order dealt with this crucial Conflicts includes the equal examination of all man- weakness, and what would have been the best loca- made features, not excluding modern elements which tion for the Mamluks to position their siege machinery are documented and studied. The underlying concept and camps during the two assaults of the castle in May of this approach is that in order to understand the 1266 and June 1271.2 meaning of a single find or feature, we need to under- Montfort Castle is isolated from main roads, com- stand the environment in which they were found and mercial centres and major settlements. The problem how they relate to it. The manner in which objects of its isolated location has been raised in the past.3 In are scattered in the landscape is examined strati- order to better understand the castle in its setting, I graphically, but also according to their focal, discrete or decided to go beyond the well-secured boundaries of expanded nature. A path, for example, can usually be the castle’s walls, to raise my head (methodologically) described as a discrete or expanded feature, but a road from the trenches, bulks and archaeological artefacts, junction where a few such features meet, is usually of and look at this specific topic of inquiry from a wide a focal nature.
    [Show full text]
  • North Carolina Archaeology
    North Carolina Archaeology Volume 65 2016 North Carolina Archaeology Volume 65 October 2016 CONTENTS Don’t Let Ethics Get in the Way of Doing What’s Right: Three Decades of Working with Collectors in North Carolina I. Randolph Daniel, Jr. ......................................................................................... 1 Mariners’ Maladies: Examining Medical Equipage from the Queen Anne’s Revenge Shipwreck Linda F. Carnes-McNaughton ........................................................................... 28 Archival Excavations from Dusty File Cabinets, Part I: Unpublished Artifact Pattern Data of Colonial Period Households, Dependency Buildings, and Public Structures from Colonial Brunswick Town Thomas E. Beaman, Jr. ...................................................................................... 53 Preface: Identifying and Defining North Carolina’s Archaeological Heritage through Remote Sensing and Geophysics John J. Mintz and Shawn M. Patch .................................................................... 90 The Role of GPR in Archaeology: A Beginning Not an End Charles R. Ewen ................................................................................................. 92 Three-dimensional Remote Sensing at House in the Horseshoe State Historic Site (31MR20), Moore County, North Carolina Stacy Curry and Doug Gallaway ..................................................................... 100 An Overview of Geophysical Surveys and Ground-truthing Excavations at House in the Horseshoe (31MR20), Moore County, North
    [Show full text]
  • Inside... DIRECTOR’S NOTE VOL
    Inside... DIRECTOR’S NOTE VOL. 24, NO. 2, DECEMBER 2020 Battlefield Archaeology Book––Francis Marion and the Snow’s Island Community RESEARCH Small Arms Evidence from Star Fort Numismatic History of Charlesfort/Santa Elena: Plantation Era New Mound at Mulberry Archaeology in South Carolina Book MARITIME RESEARCH MRD Features in National Geographic TV Channel Drain the Oceans Season 3 A Mystery Object from Mississippi SAVANNAH RIVER By Chester B. DePratter, Director of Research ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH In 1976, I first became interested in colleagues, Charles Hudson and Marvin PROGRAM Hernando de Soto and the expedition he Smith, and I have published papers on Public Outreach in Time of Covid led through the Southeast when I was the 1539-1543 route that Soto and his men SCIAA ANNUAL REPORT just beginning work on my Ph.D. at the took from their landing in Tampa Bay, A New Feature in Legacy University of Georgia. In the 44 years that Florida, to the departure of the expedition have passed since then, my friends and survivors down the Mississippi River HISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGY A New Feature in Legacy MYSTERY ARTIFACT, See Page 4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH TRUST (ART) AND SCIAA DONORS ENDOWMENT OPPORTUNITIES Stanley South Student Archaeological Research Endowment Fund Thank you for your generous support of the Archaeological Research Trust (ART) Endowment Fund and the printing of Legacy. Please send donations in the enclosed envelope to Nena Powell Rice USC/SCIAA, 1321 Pendleton Street, Columbia, SC 29208, indicating whether you want to continue receiving Legacy and include your email address. All contributions are appreciated. Please visit our website at: http://www.
    [Show full text]
  • Nadia CV 09:17:19
    Nadia C. Neff, PhD Student Department of Anthropology [email protected] University of New Mexico (970) 488 – 9932 Anthropology Annex B06E Albuquerque, New Mexico EDUCATION AND TRAINING University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM PhD Student 2019 – present Department of Anthropology Archaeology Subfield Fort Lewis College Durango, CO Visiting Instructor of Anthropology 2017 – 2019 Department of Anthropology University of York York, United Kingdom Master of Science, Bioarchaeology 2014 – 2016 Department of Archaeology Graduated with Merit Fort Lewis College Durango, CO Bachelor of Art, Anthropology 2009 – 2013 Department of Anthropology Graduated with Honors RESEARCH EXPERIENCE PhD Student 2019 - present University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM Advisors: Dr. Osbjorn Pearson, Dr Keith Prufer Rodents! Using stable isotopes to model dietary and environmental change from the Paleoindian period to the Mayan Collapse in modern Belize. – Currently studying the utility of using stable isotopes in rodent remains as a proxy for studying human dietary and environmental activity. Masters Student 2014 – 2016 University of York, York, United Kingdom Advisor: Dr. Matthew Collins Identifying potential sites of conflict through the analysis of possible human bone fragments via ZooMS (Zooarchaeology by Mass Spectrometry). – Studied the applications of using ZooMS for the identification of human bone fragments in archaeological and forensic contexts. Nadia C. Neff | [email protected] | (970) 488 – 9932 1 – Combined traditional field survey and documentation methods with biomolecular protein analysis to create human bone scatter maps to identify possible sites of conflict. – Research based on a case study involving the Battle of Towton (1461) site. Collagen extraction method testing in highly degraded bone fragments – Tested collagen extraction methods (HCl demineralization versus AmBiC surface washing) on highly degraded bone fragments found in surface and top soil finds.
    [Show full text]
  • Indiana Archaeology
    INDIANA ARCHAEOLOGY Volume 6 Number 1 2011 Indiana Department of Natural Resources Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology (DHPA) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Indiana Department of Natural Resources Robert E. Carter, Jr., Director and State Historic Preservation Officer Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology (DHPA) James A. Glass, Ph.D., Director and Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer DHPA Archaeology Staff James R. Jones III, Ph.D., State Archaeologist Amy L. Johnson, Senior Archaeologist and Archaeology Outreach Coordinator Cathy L. Draeger-Williams, Archaeologist Wade T. Tharp, Archaeologist Rachel A. Sharkey, Records Check Coordinator Editors James R. Jones III, Ph.D. Amy L. Johnson Cathy A. Carson Editorial Assistance: Cathy Draeger-Williams Publication Layout: Amy L. Johnson Additional acknowledgments: The editors wish to thank the authors of the submitted articles, as well as all of those who participated in, and contributed to, the archaeological projects which are highlighted. The U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service is gratefully acknow- ledged for their support of Indiana archaeological research as well as this volume. Cover design: The images which are featured on the cover are from several of the individual articles included in this journal. This publication has been funded in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service‘s Historic Preservation Fund administered by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology. In addition, the projects discussed in several of the articles received federal financial assistance from the Historic Preservation Fund Program for the identification, protection, and/or rehabilitation of historic properties and cultural resources in the State of Indiana.
    [Show full text]
  • Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 74-10,982
    INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. White the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • COLIN RENFREW PAUL BAHN Theories, Methods, and Practice
    COLIN RENFREW PAUL BAHN Theories, Methods, and Practice COLLEGE EDITION SEVENTH EDITION REVISED & UPDATED ~ Thames & Hudson CONTENTS Preface to the College Edition 9 BOX FEATURES Experimental Archaeology 53 Introduction Wet Preservation: The Ozette Site 60 The Nature and Aims of Archaeology 12 Dry Preservation: The Tomb of Tutankhamun 64 Cold Preservation 1: Mountain "Mummies" 67 Cold Preservation 2: Snow Patch Archaeology 68 PART I Cold Preservation 3: The Iceman 70 The Framework of Archaeology 19 3 Where? 1 The Searchers Survey and Excavation of Sites and Features 73 The History of Archaeology 21 Discovering Archaeological s.ites The Speculative Phase 22 and Features 74 The Beginnings of Modern Archaeology 26 Assessing the Layout of Sites and Features 98 Classification and Consolidation 32 Excavation 110 A Turning Point in Archaeology 40 Summary 130 World Archaeology 41 Further Reading 130 Summary 48 BOX FEATURES Further Reading 48 The Sydney Cyprus Survey Project 76 Sampling Strategies 79 BOX FEATURES Identifying Archaeological Features from Above 82 Digging Pompeii: Past and Present 24 Interpretation and Mapping From Aerial Images 86 Evolution: Darwin's Great Idea 27 Lasers in the Jungle 89 North American Archaeological Pioneers 30 GIS and the Giza Plateau 96 The Development of Field Techniques 33 Tell Ha lula: Multi-period Surface Investigations JOO Pioneering Women in Archaeology 38 Geophysical Survey at Roman Wroxeter 106 Processual Archaeology 41 Measuring Magnetism 108 Interpretive or Postprocessual Archaeologies 44 Underwater
    [Show full text]
  • Battlefield Archaeology: a Guide to the Archaeology of Conflict
    BATTLEFIELD ARCHAEOLOGY: A GUIDE TO THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF CONFLICT Guide 8 BAJR Practical Guide Series Prepared By Tim Sutherland Department of Archaeological Sciences University of Bradford With Contributions On Human Remains By Malin Holst York Osteoarchaeology Ltd © held by authors TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements v 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 WHAT IS BATTLEFIELD ARCHAEOLOGY? 1 3.0 WHY IS THE ANALYSIS OF SITES OF CONFLICT IMPORTANT? 3 3.1 THE USE OF CONFLICTS FOR PROPAGANDA AND MISINFORMATION 4 3.2 BATTLEFIELDS AS MEMORIALS 5 3.3 BATTLEFIELD TOURISM 7 3.4 RE-ENACTMENT 8 3.5 FOCI FOR SOCIAL ACTIVITIES 8 3.6 VIEWS OF THE NATIONAL BODIES 9 3.6.1 The Battlefield Trust 9 3.6.2 English Heritage 9 3.7 BATTLEFIELDS AND THE MEDIA 10 4.0 A BRIEF BATTLEFIELD HISTORY 11 4.1 INTRODUCTION 11 4.2 CASE STUDIES 13 4.2.1 Pre-Twentieth Century Archaeological Investigations 13 5.0 WHY MIGHT A SITE OF CONFLICT BE DISTURBED 14 5.1 WHAT LEGISLATION IS THERE IN PLACE TO PROTECT HISTORIC 15 BATTLEFIELDS? 5.1.1 English Legislation 15 5.1.2 Scotland 18 5.1.3 Wales 18 5.1.4 Northern Ireland 18 6.0 IDENTIFICATION OF SITES OF CONFLICT 18 6.1 EVIDENCE FOR CONFLICT 18 6.2 HOW LARGE MIGHT A BATTLEFIELD BE 19 6.3 DIFFERENT TYPES OF BATTLEFIELD SITES 19 7.0 METHODS OF EVALUATION 20 7.1 EARTHWORK SURVEYS 21 7.2 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY 21 7.2.1 Metal Detector Survey 21 7.2.2 Fluxgate Gradiometer or Magnetometer 22 7.2.3 Electrical Earth Resistance Meter 23 7.2.4 Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) 23 7.3 FIELD WALKING 23 7.4 DESK TOP ASSESSMENTS 23 8.0 ARTEFACT IDENTIFICATION
    [Show full text]
  • An Historical Archaeological Examination of a Battlefield Landscape: an Example from the American Civil War Battle of Wilson's Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 2003 An historical archaeological examination of a battlefield landscape: An Example from the American Civil War Battle of Wilson's Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia Jameson Michael Harwood College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, Military History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Harwood, Jameson Michael, "An historical archaeological examination of a battlefield landscape: An Example from the American Civil War Battle of Wilson's Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia" (2003). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539626393. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-bkaa-yg82 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. AN HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXAMINATION OF A BATTLEFIELD LANDSCAPE: An Example From The American Civil War Battle Of Wilson’s Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Anthropology The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Jameson Michael Harwood 2003 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Jameson MichaefHarwood Approved, May 2003 t Norman Barka Dennis Blanton MarleyBrown, III DEDICATION To the soldiers who fought and died the Wilson’s Wharf battlefield landscape TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements v List of Tables vi List of Figures vii Abstract ix Introduction 2 Chapter I.
    [Show full text]
  • The Editing of Eddic Poetry Judy Quinn
    A HANDBOOK TO EDDIC POETRY This is the first comprehensive and accessible survey in English of Old Norse eddic poetry: a remarkable body of literature rooted in the Viking Age, which is a critical source for the study of early Scandinavian myths, poetics, culture, and society. Dramatically recreating the voices of the legendary past, eddic poems distil moments of high emotion as human heroes and supernatural beings alike grapple with betrayal, loyalty, mortality, and love. These poems relate the most famous deeds of gods such as Óðinn and Þórr with their adversaries the giants; they bring to life the often fraught interactions between kings, queens, and heroes as well as their encounters with valkyries, elves, dragons, and dwarfs. Written by leading international scholars, the chapters in this volume showcase the poetic riches of the eddic corpus and reveal its relevance to the history of poetics, gender studies, pre-Christian religions, art history, and archaeology. carolyne larrington is Official Fellow and Tutor at St John’s College, University of Oxford. judy quinn is Reader in Old Norse Literature in the Department of Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic at the University of Cambridge. brittany schorn is a Research Associate in the Department of Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic at the University of Cambridge. A HANDBOOK TO EDDIC POETRY Myths and Legends of Early Scandinavia CAROLYNE LARRINGTON University of Oxford JUDY QUINN University of Cambridge BRITTANY SCHORN University of Cambridge University Printing House, Cambridge cb2 8bs, United Kingdom Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge. It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.
    [Show full text]
  • Idistaviso 16 Ad
    IDISTAVISO 16 AD ROMANS Germanicus, Roman General, 4 CPs Roman subordinate commander I, 3 CPs Roman subordinate commander II, 3 CPs Roman subordinate commander III, 3 CPs Germanicus’ praetorian cohorts (A3/D3 arm. swordsmen, A Grade, MV +2): 2 stands Vexillation I of legionary cohorts (A3/D3 arm. swordsmen, A Grade, MV +1): 3 stands Vexillation II of legionary cohorts (A3/D3 arm. swordsmen, A Grade, MV +1): 3 stands Vexillation III of legionary cohorts (A3/D3 arm. swordsmen, A Grade, MV +1): 3 stands Vexillation IV of legionary cohorts (A3/D3 arm. swordsmen, A Grade, MV +1): 3 stands Vexillation V of legionary cohorts (A3/D3 arm. swordsmen, A Grade, MV 0): 3 stands Vexillation VI of legionary cohorts (A3/D3 arm. swordsmen, A Grade, MV 0): 3 stands Auxiliary cohorts I (A3/D3 arm. swordsmen, B Grade, MV +1): 4 stands Auxiliary cohorts II (A3/D3 arm. swordsmen, B Grade, MV +1): 4 stands Auxiliary cohorts III (A3/D3 arm. swordsmen, B Grade, MV 0): 4 stands Auxiliary cohorts IV (A3/D3 arm. swordsmen, B Grade, MV 0): 4 stands Batavian cohorts (A2/D2/S arm. javelinmen, B Grade, MV +1): 2 stands Auxiliary archers & slingers I (A0/D1/S/L missile troops, B Grade, MV 0): 4 stands Auxiliary archers & slingers II (A0/D1/S/L missile troops, B Grade, MV 0): 4 stands Equites alares I (A3/D1/S heavy cavalry, A Grade, MV +1): 3 stands Equites alares II (A3/D1/S heavy cavalry, A Grade, MV +1): 3 stands Equites cohortales I (A3/D1/S heavy cavalry, B Grade, MV 0): 3 stands Equites cohortales II (A3/D1/S heavy cavalry, B Grade, MV 0): 3 stands GERMANS Arminius, Cherusci general, 4 CPs Cherusci subordinate commander, 3 CPs Cherusci comitatus (A3/D2 shock infantry, B Grade, MV +2): 4 stands Cherusci warriors I (A3/D2 shock infantry, C Grade, MV +1): 6 stands Cherusci warriors II (A3/D2 shock infantry, C Grade, MV +1): 6 stands Noble cavalry/youths I (A3/D1/S int.
    [Show full text]
  • George Rogers Clark ~ Archaeology of a Frontier Hero
    George Rogers Clark ~ Archaeology of a Frontier Hero As often happens, when we learn about many important figures in American history it becomes apparent that they were multi-talented individuals, and multi-faceted. General George Rogers Clark, that great figure in the history of our state and nation, was just such a man. Well known are his heroic military skills and accomplishments, and how those dramatic accomplishments helped form our nation at a critical point in its early development. We might also be aware of his surveying, diplomatic, and inventing skills. But, perhaps not everyone knows that this man also had interests in archaeology, paleontology, geology, and natural history (Thomas and Conner 1967). Archaeology by, and related to, George Rogers Clark in Indiana can be separated into several locations to highlight. The first of these is Fort Sackville, the British outpost described as one “of several forts built by the French, British or Americans from 1732 to 1813 in this important frontier settlement [Vincennes, Indiana]” (National Park Service 2004). Lt. Col. Clark and his brave men in 1779 captured the fort from the British. In recognition of the importance of this military feat, and its significance in our country’s history, the country erected the impressive Beaux Arts monument which stands today in Vincennes. The monument and grounds are now part of the George Rogers Clark National Historical Park, administered by the National Park Service. Sadly, no professional archaeological investigations appear to have been conducted prior to when the site for the monument was cleared of other existing structures, and the excavation preparations for the monument were conducted in the 1930s.
    [Show full text]