Talk:Castle

Template:Architecture AID Archives: 1

Americas?

Are there any castles in the Americas? JIP | Talk 08:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, there's a List of castles in the United States. But whether you actually consider them real castles is another thing. Most of them were built far more recently than those built in Europe in the middle ages. So while they may have the appearance of castles (eg. Boldt Castle) they probably weren't built with any serious defensive purpose. --David Edgar 17:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

The answer to your question is yes, there is at least one real castle in the Americas. The Castle is in Chapultepec Park, in the heart of Mexico City. Chapultepec Castle was a residence for Emperor Maximilian of Mexico and his consort Empress Carlota of Mexico. The Castle or Palace, which it is also called, was built in different stages...It was during the Second Mexican Empire in the 1860's that it reached its current state. The Aztecs considered the hill {Chapultepec means 'Grasshopper hill' in Náhuatl) on which it is built to be sacred. Emperor Moctezuma had a summer home there, before European take over. --C.Kent87 02:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

That is a palace, not a castle. They are two different things as this article attempts to explain. Castles are primarily defensive structures. ::Supergolden:: 09:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The only real castles in America were in New France; the continent's only fortified city is Québec (the Citadelle of Quebec), while some of Montréal's outlying forts where built like the fortified manor houses of France. Fort Longueuil, built in 1695-1698, for example, had conical roofs on round turrets in each corner, and has been described as "the most medieval looking fort built in Canada". The "most substantial castle-like fort" near Montréal was Fort Senneville, of 1692. Both of these, among others, fit the articles description of a defensive "residence and commands a specific territory". --Grimhelm 13:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Bias

This article barely mention anything about castles and fortresses in Italy... this is unbelievable, as the art of castles there is among the best in the world!! Wanna speak of Castel del Monte? Or Italian Renaissance military architects? Further, it cites all the same, usual castles that are cited in ALL banal sources... ideas for something more detailed and in-deth are welcome!!!... Maybe I shall provide in the futre when I'll have some time, but if you can, you're invited to so something to recover this unfair situation. Bye and good work. --Attilios 23:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The article is a hodge podge of 100s (1000s?) of editors adding a few words, sentences or occasionally even entire paragraphs over the course of 5 years or so. The subject of castles is so large and diverse that it needs many separate articles. Not only on individual castles, but one on history, regional variations (not just Europe either), building techniques etc.. basically the subject matter is wide open for anyone who wants to take it on. Castles in Italy would be a great start if you know about it. -- Stbalbach 00:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Of course I agree with you, but as the article is now, it should be entitled Castles in Britain... I have a good series of four Italian articles about history of castles, which looks less biased than the stuff here... I'll provide as soon as possible to translate it (don't worry, it si not too much biased towards Italy). Bye and good work. --Attilios 09:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually it should be Castles in England, which is why I suggested moving the big chunk of stuff about 'Britain' to that page. ::Supergolden:: 10:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

"Some cities later emerged from castles founded in this period: a notable example"

is the ending sentence of a section. Yes it really has nothing after that including a period. Some cities later emerged from castles founded in this period: a notable example is <insert city name here>. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.32.125.13 (talk) 22:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC).

Rating

Sadly, I have to rate this article as "Start", as was already the case with the other two WikiProjects. It has the material to be "B" class, but as the core article for the Castles Wikiproject, this centres entirely around Europe. Realistically, it gives more of a list of facts for categorising individual castles rather than giving an logical outline of the development of castles. I have added some information regarding castles in New France, but we still need a lot more about Russia, the Middle-east and Japan.

The material, the potential and the sources are there, but there are virtually no direct references. There were two footnotes before I reviewed this article, and a few inline citations that should have been in footnote style. The style is messy, and this sentence cuts off randomly: "Some cities later emerged from castles founded in this period: a notable example" What? I may never know what this line was trying to tell me. The really sad thing is that I just noticed someone brought this up on 8 January, just before me. It still hasn't been addressed.

This article will have difficulty trying to keep the casual reader interested, and it needs some major cleanup and improvement before we can call this key topic an article. I will vote for Wikipedia:Article_Creation_and_Improvement_Drive#Castle. --Grimhelm 18:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The Castle nomination is overdue on WP:ACID, and only one more vote is needed. --Grimhelm 08:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

"Famous Castles" and "Gallery" sections

I move that these two sections be deleted from the article. "Famous castles" is inherently indefinable, and is just an invitation to anyone to add their favourite. The same can be said of the gallery. Neither section contributes a great deal to the article, except in terms of length. Unless a definitive, unbiased list of the "most famous" castles can somehow be determined, let's remove it altogether. ::Supergolden:: 13:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Support. If there are no objections I will go ahead with this. The whole point of the gallery is already filled by the Commons, and unless the pictures can be used in a relevant context, there is little point in them being lumped together. The famous castles can also be removed, as it already offers a link to List of castles. --Grimhelm 19:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Architecture Improvement Drive

I don't advise anyone risk following this up. On your own head be it! Giano 20:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

March 2007 changes

Cleaned up some of the text. Provided clearer picture of motte. Reverted image from the Bayeux tapestry, since it is an internationally recognized source for castel development and history. CJ DUB 13:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks like a lot of work has been done. I was disappointed to see all the images lined up along the right hand side, instead of staggered left and right per the recommended MoS guidelines. -- Stbalbach 19:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem - take over. I have yet to write one single word. I was about to start on the text today. The lead is dreadful and needs a complete re-write. The whole thing needs ordering and vast chunks of repetitition removing. Some fact are either wrong or plain misleading, and many important ones mising. The pictures were of little use and out of context. The Motte and bailey Image:Tapisserie motte maquette.jpg looked like a work of art brought home from school by a less than talented infant. I've no wish to tread on the expert's toes. Next time a see an improvement drive appeal - I shall no where to put it! Appologies for the ruffled feathers Giano 19:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure the Museum of Bayeux would like to hear that about their model, since historians do often use these techniques to show battles and fortifications. But since we already have the tapestry image, it probably was redundant. I've tried to realign/reformat some of the pictures per Stbalbach. --Grimhelm 20:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

It is a rubbish image, because it depicts the motte being a mountain, a singular isolated rocky mountain! Maybe there is a castle somewhere in the world where the builders were so fortunate in the landscape. For a limited space encyclopedic article it is not suitable. At small resolution the image is ridiculous. Giano 20:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Images

I've been away for a while, so don't know who changed the castle images at the beginning of the article. As often, there's a flood of British castles, as if only in that countries castles could exist. I'll remove one or two to reinstate an international point of view.--Attilios 20:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The idea was to have images reflecting techniques described in the text, not plucked at whim because Italy or Spain was yet to be represented. This is an encyclopedic page not Miss World! Giano 20:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, then please find international examples instead of making this only marginally different from Castles in Britain. Until users'll be able to make such, I think the Globalize mark should remain. Bye. --Attilios 20:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The best illustrative images just happen to be British - I wonder why that is? Bye to you too. Giano 21:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the ones you know... I can't believe that here there's nothing best. For example, Castel Sant'Angelo is clearly more famous than Portchester Castle as a re-use of Roman structures for a castle. Ciao and good work. --Attilios 21:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Porchester image was the better examample of what I was planning to exemplify! Had I been allowed to finish!. Ciao! Giano 21:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Attilios, Great Britain is not the only place where there are castles...I had a picture of part of the Mexican Castle of Chapultepec...and someone took it down in favor of a British Castle -as if there weren't enough of those......then someone with a German sounding user name put up the Bavarian Castle! Please be fair and grant at least one picture per country with castles! C.Kent87 22:40, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Was the page concerned with Mexican castles? Giano 22:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

No, and you can stop being sarcastic...It was in the Revival Castles article (I'm sure you already know)...Just keep up with your ranting...C.Kent87 22:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Australia and Uganda are woefully underrepresented as well. You biased eurocentric, you. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I propose a page name move to Castles visited by Wikipedians on their holidays Giano

Surely that was the original name of this article? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:51, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be very interesting to see some pictures of the exploding castles in the 11th century, from no matter what early European states.[1] "In many of early states of Europe, castle-building exploded in the 11th century, as local warlords staked claims to formerly royal prerogatives in their petty states." BLAAAM! Frutti di Mare 23:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

LOL...haha ; ] C.Kent87 23:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

You should also have Korean castles —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.214.134.49 (talk) 05:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

Content First

Sorry to be stating the bleedin' obvious - but perhaps it would be better to write the article first and then worry about how to illustrate it? --Mcginnly | Natter 11:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

That's true. I'd like to point out though, that of the three images of British castles, the Tower of London (England) and Caernarfon Castle (Wales) are quite notable (the latter was influenced by the walls of Constantinople), while the tapestry motte illustrates historical development. We don't need many more British castles, because to be fair and balanced, castles from other countries can be used to illustrate techniques. I would also like to point out that this article did have a large (and rather pointless) gallery, before I removed it to the following page for reference:

User:Grimhelm/Castle_Gallery

And while we're on the topic of content, wasn't a major point of this improvement drive to remove Eurocentric bias? Why was the section on Japanese castles removed? We should at least describe the castles of Japan, Russia and the Middle-east. --Grimhelm 21:50, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see...that's why you removed the picture of a tower of Chapultepec Castle in Mexico in favor of the German one...I must say, your very wishy-washy. Cali567 02:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Let's see... Firstly, Chapultepec Castle is not in Japan, Russia or the Middle-east, which is what I just said we needed. Secondly, "the German one" is better known (for example see the loathed Disney castle), while discussion on the talk page suggested that Chapultepec should be removed for being a palace, not a castle. Thirdly, it should be noted that I removed Inveraray Castle (Scotland) from the section on "Revival castles" to put Neuschwanstein in place, not Chapultepec. [2] The Chapultepec image was of a single 1833 watchtower rather than an effective picture of a whole castle, and when I removed it a week before, I did not try to replace it with Neuschwanstein (in fact, I had put <!-- --> around Neuschwanstein when I removed the "list of famous castle"). [3]

Please be more cautious before making such accusations, especially because I do think we need some content on colonial castles in the Americas (I added the paragraph on those in New France - one of the few to have remained intact during the drive - and hope to add some on castles in the Spanish Main in the future); but these draw on European influences and are not as needed as the three areas I mentioned. --Grimhelm 08:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Uh, those are forts and mansions you are talking about. There are no true castles in North America, there are no castles in the spanish main. This page has only one teeny section for revival castles, and that where most of these Western hemispehere castles belong. CJ DUB 16:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Wrong, those are not mansions. You are correct if you mean there were no true castles in the United States of America, but there were castles in the Americas in general. They fulfill all the definition of castles, from both a defensive, architectural and residential perspective; in fact, castles were still dominant in Europe when they were first being built, and they were under the control of lords. The first of the three fort stages (by which I mean defensive structures) in North America were in fact Spanish castles, starting with Fortaleza Ozama:

"Simple but sturdy structures, these castles were essentially European medieval castles transposed to America."

Take a look at the picture on the right: were this 1502 castle in Europe, would you consider it anything other than such? It was only after the 16th century that these castles evolved into true forts in the Spanish Main, and New France built castles alongside forts until the late 17th century (it is just important to distinguish between true castles, true forts, and revival structures). I can (and have) provide sources, and it even falls within the scope of WikiProject Castles.

Not only that, it does belong in the section: "Response to the advent of gunpowder". This is how castle architecture responded to gunpowder in the New World. --Grimhelm 16:44, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Great point but they stopped building new castles in europe before 1503. The castles they were using in europe up to the 1600s were built in the medieval period. That is the key point. What was built in the new world was either fort or fortified residence or mansion, and they simply meet the needs of the time. Here's a question: I have a house with battlements on it in Africa. I shoot anybody who approches it. Its built on land our family has owned for generations. I have rights over the land and forest. I also have people who work for me. Do I own a castle? CJ DUB 17:20, 15 March 2007 (UTC) Oh I forgot: the house was built in 1992 and has a big sign that says "Yes. This IS a Castle" on the front.

Another excellent point, but it seems that is because African castle-like structures did not develop from a background similar to European castles, whereas the conditions in America were similar to those in Europe after the fall of Rome (such residential structures were under threat from Indians and other colonies). 1992 "African castles" would not be defined as castles by experts, and would instead be revival castles, whereas the sources I have cited refer to such forts in America as being true castles. Indeed, they follow a "direct line of descent" (if you will) from European castles. Also, it's not necessarily the period that counts: Japanese castles were being built at the same time as castles in the Americas, and these are considered castles.

Even if they weren't true castles, a paragraph on them is important for the development of castles; but in the end, it is the fact that we have reliable sources recognising these buildings as true castles that counts, and that is what will make Wikipedia a reputable encyclopedia. :-) --Grimhelm 17:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

British Bias

Regarding the accusations of me being pro-British: Firstly I am not British! Secondly I imported several non British castles to this page. Thirdly I chose the best images to demonstrate what I was going to say in the text to explain the evolution of castles both politically and architecturally, i.e. the fact that northern French and English castles have great similarities for political reasons, as do castles in Italy have affinity with others in various parts of Europe, while the Moorish, Spanish and Sicilian castles have a similar relationship. Then we come to the influence they had on revival castle design in South America, and why that differed from the romantic Gothic employed at the same time in Northern Europe. Then we could have crossed to Australia and seen how they adopted the Scottish baronial to suit their climate [4], and again in New Zealand [5], not to mention the castles of the Crimea. Sadly one was never allowed to get that far because some people insisted on pretty pictures designed to include their favourite holiday snap, or suit their partisan tastes. This is an encyclopedia not a nationalistic ego trip. Giano 09:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Haha, very good explanation...it works for me. Although, I don't see what stopped you from putting various pictures (countries) in the first place. And you don't have to be British to be Pro-British...that we know. Lastly, Mexico is in North America, not South. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by C.Kent87 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

I meant South America! Giano 18:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

pros and cons

i need pros and cons for the page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.214.134.49 (talk) 05:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

What do you mean? --Dweller 18:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I need the good things and the bad things about castles. Pros and Cons —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.214.134.49 (talk) 04:41, 15 March 2007 (UTC).