Weren't people much smaller in those days? Maybe adult men could have fit just fine.
Not that small (1.0-1.4m).
Children were small enough.
Digging a subterranean tunnel with a wooden-bladed shovel is going to SUCK. I'd skimp, too.
The secret medieval tunnels that we still don't understand
51–57 of 57 posts
Re: The secret medieval tunnels that we still don't understand
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only if the tube was used for long enough to need food. If you are hiding your family from almost certain death, 24 hours with no food or water in a cool dark cave is a possibility.
The proximity to churches + lack of ventilation makes this theory unlikely in my head. I also feel that some families would have grabbed some food or water before heading down there.
Why does proximity to churches matter?
Re: The secret medieval tunnels that we still don't understand
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed: that would help reconcile the presumed secrecy with the fact that, also per the article, there are upwards of 2000 of these tunnel-structures that fall into this category. All across Central Europe. Aggressor knows THAT there's likely a safe-tunnel, but doesn't know exactly WHERE the safe-tunnel is, and whether it's worth taking the time to find... For that matter—A place to stash the kids from the census-tak…
Read the paragraph about halfway down: The erdstall surely could not have been built with storage in mind, since their length and narrowness offer no advantages over a conventional and convenient cellar. And while three brave explorers in the 21st century once spent 48 hours in an erdstall, crawling to new sections whenever oxygen became scarce, it seems unlikely that they would have been constructed as hiding places…
Read my comment. I literally quoted half of what you're telling me to read. That's what I'm critiquing.
And you might not have time to bring your family out to the surrounding forests. If these were centrally located in town, they might have been intended just for the people who happened to be in town at the moment.
I'm not saying that I know what they were for. Just that the reasons the article gives for saying they weren't for hiding don't hold up at all.
Re: The secret medieval tunnels that we still don't understand
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the alternative was being hacked to death, I venture to guess you probably would.
No, the alternative would be that they would have build something tat would much better fit that purpose. You are trying to fit a square peg through a round hole here. The article mentions why all the common ideas don't make sense. The theories proposed here are merely examples of human brains ability to come up with a fantastic story for anything in the absence of data. Ex falso quodlibet - from zero follows everyth…
Why are you quoting to me something I myself already quoted in order to disagree with...?
I know the article mentions why hiding doesn't make sense. My whole comment is about how the reasons it gives don't hold up.
Re: The secret medieval tunnels that we still don't understand
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
The proximity to churches + lack of ventilation makes this theory unlikely in my head. I also feel that some families would have grabbed some food or water before heading down there.
Why does proximity to churches matter?
Having your family leave the home & run to the church during an attack seems ill-advised.
Re: The secret medieval tunnels that we still don't understand
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does proximity to churches matter?
Having your family leave the home & run to the church during an attack seems ill-advised.
Presumably it's not meant for the entire town. Just the people who are already in town nearby who have enough advance warning. It makes sense to be in a church since that's in the center of town and you can lock the doors to give enough time for people to get into it and cover the entrance.
If your family were at home in the nearby countryside they'd flee into the forest or something instead.
Re: The secret medieval tunnels that we still don't understand
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read the paragraph about halfway down: The erdstall surely could not have been built with storage in mind, since their length and narrowness offer no advantages over a conventional and convenient cellar. And while three brave explorers in the 21st century once spent 48 hours in an erdstall, crawling to new sections whenever oxygen became scarce, it seems unlikely that they would have been constructed as hiding places…
Read my comment. I literally quoted half of what you're telling me to read. That's what I'm critiquing. And you might not have time to bring your family out to the surrounding forests. If these were centrally located in town, they might have been intended just for the people who happened to be in town at the moment. I'm not saying that I know what they were for. Just that the reasons the article gives for saying they…
The ones I'm aware of aren't in the middle of town, and by definition they can't be because they're holes in the soil landscape which is in short supply in the centre of a town. They're near small villages for which getting your family into hiding can be as simple as walking across the road into forests, ravines, etc. It'd actually be much easier to just herd your family into some nearby patch of wilderness than to shove them all into a hole in the ground without food, water, or toilet facilities.
In any case hostile forces don't just teleport into your village, they're moving on foot and stopping to loot on the way, you've usually got weeks of warning that something bad is happening and days of warning that it's about to happen to you. The whole shelter theory just doesn't hold water.