Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a25daf8daae2aea1

Jump to content

Talk:Tollense

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Tytire in topic Recommend new page for the battle

Recommend new page for the battle

[edit]

The Battle of Tollense Bridge, or whatever name they want to put to it, should be its own page. Maybe there's a good long German word for it ("der Tollensekrieg"?). Either way it seems to be a topic of interest, and only tangentially related to the river's geological history. --Zimriel (talk) 22:19, 26 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

agreeExplainador (talk) 01:53, 28 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
Done. Input appreciated. --Ubel (talk) 18:04, 26 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Agree Tytire (talk) 23:37, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Dating of the battle

[edit]

The article has a decent section about the Bronze age Tollense battle (which really deserves its own page) but something is signally missing: any information about the rough date limits of the battle. "Bronze age" is much too broad: more than a thousand years. The masses of human and horse bones make it quite possible to date the battle, and some German and English pages I've read in the past indicated the 13th/14th century BC. I just checked the German wiki article for the battle and it says 13th century based on C-14 dating, but this is sourced to a university page that's been reshuffled a bit since the German wiki editors looked at it, and which no longer has any specific information about the excavations. So we need to find a few sources that actually do say something about the date, and preferably both in German and in English. Strausszek (talk) 02:56, 12 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

The Jantzen article in Antiquity 85, 2011, says that 9 of the 10 radiocarbon dates up to that point place the event at 1230 BC, the Flohr article in International Journal of Paleopathology 9, 2015, says c. 1200 BC in Period III of the Nordic Bronze Age, and the Lidke article in the book 'Krieg - Eine archäologische Spurensuche' says 1300-1250 BC. European Prehistorian (talk) 23:46, 16 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I believe the earlier date are from one human and the wooden club, with specific caveat that the club maybe an "old wood" effect. The rest, all the human remains so far appear to be in the range of 1230+/-40 cal bc ie 1270 to 1190 bce. Keep in mind the range is for dating of all of the material, the +/- range does not imply the bones themselves are in range, they clearly look to be the same exact eventExplainador (talk) 01:52, 28 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Removal of Ahistorical section

[edit]

Removed a spurious section full of fantastical speculation and non-factual conjecture.  Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerold.v.k (talkcontribs) 07:53, 11 April 2017 (UTC)Reply