Kalkriese the Battle of the Angrivarii Wall ?

[Tom]

I have since youth been intrigued by the tale of Varus's three legions defeat by Arminius and have followed the discovery and finds at the Kalkriese site with great interest. At first I thought the claim of it being part of the site of the 'Battle of the Teutoberger Forest' very plausible. But after reading a post on a German site a year or so ago, my doubt has grown as I have considered the evidence in light of a simple but direct claim made there.

The claim was basically: The Kalkriese site is not the site of the 'Battle of the Teutoberger Wald' (Varus Battle)in 9 AD, but of a battle that occurred several years later called 'The Battle of the Angrivarii Wall' sometime around 15-16 AD. It's location is within the area settled by the Angrivarii tribe at the time.

To this I would add:

The three main sources we have for the battle collectively mention quite a few details of setting, such as weather, and the nature of the ground, camps, etc. But no source of the Varus battle mentions a defensive wall used by the Germans. It is such a significant feature, that it is difficult for me to believe it would not be mentioned. When the battlefield was initially rediscovered in the late eighties, it was already being presented as the probable site of the Varus battle, based on the early finds of coins and equipment. The discovery of the defensive wall (made of cut turves and wood) came as a complete surprise to the excavators. And the two camps (big & little) mentioned by a source built during the 3 day battle, have yet to be found.

But a Germanic wall is described in the source we have of the later 'Battle of the Angrivarrii Wall' and indeed it gave the Battle it's name. Here is just a brief summary of the Battle ala Wiki:

"For punitive expeditions Germanicus used the Ems river, which flowed from the heart of the country occupied by the tribes that became the Franks. These were still under Arminius, who had led the German confederation to the victory in 9. Unlike Arminius' native tribe, the Cherusci, the loyalty of the other tribes in the confederation was at best equivocal.

The Angrivarii's defection or revolt (defectio) in the middle of Arminius's renewed operations against the Teutoburg Forest must have been secured in advance by Germanicus. Even if it was not, a cavalry attack soon brought the Angrivarii's capitulation. Soon afterwards, however, they are back in alliance with the Cherusci and opposition to the Romans, setting an ambush at the Cheruscan border, which was a high dirt embankment. They hid their cavalry in the woods and stationed their infantry on the reverse slope of the bank. The Romans had intelligence of the plan beforehand. They assaulted the embankment, preceding their assault with volleys from slings and spears thrown by machines. Driving the Angrivarii from the bank, they went on to pursue the cavalry in the woods. Once again the Angrivarii were totally routed."

In addition to finds, I have tried to follow the attempts at reconstructing routes and locations, but that continues to be a frustrating and to my mind spectulative method. No reconstructions ever really seem to fit all the source material (which is questionable itself) and too much doubt exsists even on which rivers are meant. Does anyone yet really know the location of the main fort mentioned in association with the Varus battle, Alisio?

So my view is that the Kalkriese site is not conclusively the site of the Varus site, and some strong arguments exsist for it being the later battle in 14-15 AD.

Which could mean the site of the Varus Schlacht (as the Germans call it) still is out there undiscovered.

What do you think, in light of the above ?

[Jona Lendering]

It is possible, I'd say.

[Gaius Colletti]

Haven't coins from Kalkriese been dated no later than AD9

[ANTONIVS MAGNVS]

Most of the coins found were denarii of Augustus with Caius and Lucius reverse minted in Lugdunum. These are dated to 2BC-2AD. I'd have to check my references to see if anything was found that could be dated more precisely.

EDIT: Looking at one of my sources I see that a moneyer's series AE As of Augustus was found at the site that was counter marked VAR for Varus. By far the majority of the coins though are the above mentioned denarii of Augustus dated to no later than 2AD though plenty of earlier republic and Imperatorial coins were found.

[Gaius Colletti]

Also Tom doesn't Tacitus mention the Roman's had created earthen walls that they attacked the Romans from at one point? As well as fortifications for the trap that must have taken "weeks to prepare"?

[ANTONIVS MAGNVS]

I also wonder if it's not 9AD battlefield then who does the gold and silver plate that was found belong to if not Varus?

Tony Clunn wrote an excellent book "The Quest for the Lost Roman Legions, Discovering the Varus Battlefield". He's the one who "discovered" the very first coins on the site and was involved on and off throughout the excavation.

[caiusbeerquitius]

Haven't coins from Kalkriese been dated no later than AD9

This was debunked by Reinhard Wolters, Chiron 32, S. 297–323; 2002.
See also Jackson Shaw´s article here:

http://www.clades-variana.com/beurteilun...kriese.htm

together with the correct dating of the coins (University of Erfurt).

Except for the excavators, who can hardly say anything else, since they defended their positions too hard for too long, none of the prominent historians and archaeologists bring Kalkriese and the Varus battle together any longer. Meanwhile even the local University of Osnabrück with Günther Moosbauer as Archaologist only speaks of a "late Augustan battle site".

Also, use the search function, there is a longer thread here on RAT....

[Gaius Colletti]

For those of us who either don't speak German or want to read multiple pages of text in Google's still kind of faulty translator, can you be more specific Christian? Skimming through I saw something about 11 AD and 13/14 AD

Although I think I understand what this means: "Indicates. BC because of the precious metal with the transfer issue 12th to Lugdunum was virtually the entire burden of the imperial gold embossing on the local mint, and the continuation of the output of the aureus is the type of Caius / Lucius to 13/14 AD. to accept."

I'd hardly want to read pages of that sort of broken English. I'm sure the grammar is better in the German version.

Also, RAT has possibly one of the worst search engines ever conceived, it is a headache to use as it spits out every post written in a thread who's title matches your search words. Perhaps you could be more specific on the title of this thread?

[caiusbeerquitius]

Took me about 30 seconds to find, by typing "Kalkriese" in the search engine... :roll:
Kalkriese not the site.... thread

For those of us who either don't speak German or want to read multiple pages of text in Google's still kind of faulty translator, can you be more specific Christian? Skimming through I saw something about 11 AD and 13/14 AD

The initial dating of the coins was based on the hypothesis that after the death of Gaius in 4 the Gaius-Lucius coins were no longer produced. This hypothesis turned out to be wrong. They were made until 13/14. This broke apart the whole coin dating for Kalkriese, with was linked to the Haltern horizon. The Haltern horizon, as we know by now, was also extended to 15/16. So we have to facts showing that Berger´s coin dating was erroneous, and it was this coin dating that was the major argument for Kalkriese being the / a site of the varus battle.

[Gaius Colletti]

Not that I am overly advocate of Kalkriese being the site of the Varian Disaster, but the Romans won the battle against the Angrivarii. Why would we have found so much Roman equipment, surely the Romans would have swept over the battle field after chasing away the Germanic tribes and recovered their dead and equipment, instead we have what appears to be the opposite finding no German weapons, as the Germans collected their dead leaving Romans and their equipment, similar to what Tacitus describes with the Germans leaving the Romans where they were died in his accounts of the Varian Disaster with some sort of religious reason.

[Tom]

First, thank all for your comments! I have been out of the loop for a year or so and need to do some brushing up on the latest research. I was unaware that there has been a more general moving away from the link of Kalkriese to the Varus battle, and that the Haltern site is also now showing evidence of 15-16 AD inhabitation. The link to the discussion on the coins was very interesting.

As far as the finds at Kalkriese being almost exclusively roman (I think I just read a Germanic cavalry spur being the exception), two reasons have been mentioned frequently.
One was that the most of the Germanic gear was made of materials that do not survive long in or on the ground (animal skins, cloth, wood, etc). A shortage of metal and lack of defensive armor among the Germanic tribes is also mentioned in sources, including spears entirely of wood with just the end sharpened and fire-hardened.
The other reason is that while at the Varian battle the mass of Germanic soldiers would have been armed in their native fashion, at the later battles (like the Angrivarii Wall, the Germanic warriors would likely have been armed with some of the Roman equipment looted off the Varian battle. Varus's three legions and attached units would have yielded many thousands of weapons and armor sets. So the Kalkriese finds could be actually be from either army.

Still having trouble finding that earlier thread, but will keep at it.

[caiusbeerquitius]

The earlier thread is linked in my post above... :wink:

Why would we have found so much Roman equipment

Did you ever check the publications? The area of which most of the finds derive is roughly 100 by 40 meters, pretty much that of a fielded cohort. Also interesting in regard of the inscriptions found mainly "P" and "I" for "PRIMA", apparently. A first cohort fighting there, perhaps? That of the first Legion, perhaps? The area prospected is much larger as the area of which most finds derive, alas, almost no finds were made elsewhere, as can be read in Kalkriese 2. The number of individuals from the bone pits is 16 (+1?) including female bones. Not very many, right? By now even the German WP states that Kalkriese as place of the Varus battles is rather "a hypothesis" challenged by many renowned German historians and archaeologists, and that the early identification was "overly hasty".

surely the Romans would have swept over the battle field after chasing away the Germanic tribes and recovered their dead and equipment, instead we have what appears to be the opposite finding no German weapons, as the Germans collected their dead leaving Romans and their equipment, similar to what Tacitus describes with the Germans leaving the Romans where they were died in his accounts of the Varian Disaster with some sort of religious reason.

Maybe. But just hypothetical, I am afraid. Hardly an argument in the whole discussion. If desired to be one, would need evidence to be factual.

[Robert Vermaat]

Also, RAT has possibly one of the worst search engines ever conceived, it is a headache to use as it spits out every post written in a thread who's title matches your search words. Perhaps you could be more specific on the title of this thread?

I found that using Google while mentioning 'romanamytalk' plus a subject sometimes works better, especially if the threads are older than, say, 2 years.

[Tom]

I have now found the earlier discussion. For some reason the link is not working for me, but I was able to locate the thread using 'Kalkriese not the site' in Search.
The description of the 'Crisis' meeting was very interesting. I have to follow-up on some of the links though & re-read the sources on the later battles.
One general impression I had was that when the finds were first made, a feeling that they had just uncovered the 'tip of the iceberg' was pervasive. That is that they had just uncovered a portion of a larger battlefield. But in the 25 years since, the expected larger ammount of human remains and finds has not materialized. It may be that they just haven't dug in the right spots, or it may be that the right spots are somewhere else entirely.
In some repects the location of the Varus Battle is back 'Up on the Air'. But the finds there are still important in the big picture. The Campaigns of 9-16 AD are like a big puzzle where we started without even having any of the pieces. The Kalkriese site is at least a puzzle piece, like Haltern, and the more pieces that are found, the better chance of solving it becomes.

Haven't figured out how to make a Signature yet in the Profile section
Real name is Tom Scully.

[Simplex]

Ahmmmm mmmmh,
...here's da "nasty" Kalkriese discussion again. :mrgreen:
I faintly remember that there were times on this forum, when discussion over this became
heated/"a bit personal" :roll: ...while I think the stature of this problem justifies to keep it under discussion constantly,( Until it finally solves ?) I hope this here stays as "cool" as it is.
Now, when reading through this thread I had some other "flashbacks".
IIRC they did not adress Kalkriese as varian battlefield-scene before Summer 1991.
Tony Clunn had already made finds since even before 1987, then. (Mostly coins IIRC)
A lot of arguments have been dealt forth and back, but something seems to have gone overlooked : I also faintly remembered that there were (then) traces found at nearby Schwagstorf, that hinted to wards an roman marching camp of 70ha size -- judged after aerial photographs.
I've been searching the net for the photograph(s) and was not able to find any single reference to it, -- until today.
Here's this news-article from german magazine "DER SPIEGEL":
http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-13492582.html
I still have to find a photograph of this location again.
(I faintly remember having seen it those days and it really looked like Marktbreit someway)
But in the meantime I keep wondering why there seems to be no research on this place
or even a statement, that the "first impression" was wrong. (Maybe I overlooked s.th.)
This may be a "by-problem" only but it signifies to what may have gone wrong at Kalkriese IMHO.

Greez

Simplex

P.S.

Today is my day ( in a way). :roll:
Just found a reference to the Schwagstorf trench-traces:
http://www.theiss.de/pdf/3806217602.pdf
...it says that the aerial photos were made by german reconnaisance-icon Otto Braasch in
1990 and subsequent prospection did find NO early roman finds, but gave rise to the
perception of it as a part of a (medieval?) defence-line.