[e2021]

As others have said, I don't find these arguments very convincing - if castles were mainly residences, then why have crenelations, or arrow slits or a moat, doesn't that argument apply equally to those? The argument that if such a defensive feature was needed, then its already too late, and so it was probably never used is also not a good one imo. Has the CWIS gun on aircraft carriers ever actually been used in combat? Am I to conclude that CWIS has no defensive use and is purely architectural ornamentation?

The only good point is that it wasn't mentioned by contemporary sources, but I don't think this proves anything unless you can show that other defensive features on castles were mentioned. Otherwise maybe we just have bad sources about castle design. But if you can show me some documents about why eg. moats are designed they way they are, then I think you have a point.

[pwinnski]

It would be worth noting what percentage of castle from this same period feature a moat or crenelations or arrow slits, right?

The book is about why it's actually a myth. This article is about how stories get started and passed down with no basis in fact, and is really promotional material for the book.

And here we are in 2021, and people are defending a story invented in 1902 about design decisions made more than 500 years prior, and it's unclear how many of them had even heard the original myth before reading this article!

The gnosticism is very strong today.

[jandrese]

It would make sense that military secrets like opting for right hand spirals would not appear in popular publications.

Even the 70/30 split mentioned in the article is telling. If it truly did not matter then you would expect a 50/50 split, so there is a thumb on the scale somewhere. Maybe some early famous castles had them and the feature was replicated in newer castles? But what if the original castles had them for defensive purposes? The newer castles could have been built with defensive features they didn't fully understand.

[jeltz]

I don't think many people are defending the myth, most just seem to critisize bad arguments. Just because something is not supported by facts does not make all counter arguments automatically valid.

[pwr-electronics]

I can't find it now, but I remember watching a YouTube video about how the military aspect of castles was more about projecting power over the local population to prevent and put down rebellion. This article talks about how it was also both a home security system and a status symbol. You technically had to be licensed to fortify your property.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licence_to_crenellate

[hef19898]

Well, castles were also used as bases to dominate the country side. And to show of wealth. The dominating part was made easier by bwing easily defended, turning them into ideal bases of operations. How someone could argue castles weren't military buildings, I don't know.

[7952]

It just seems foolish to generalise about something that existed for a long time in different guises.