 UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
 Castle Quest
 Comments And Suggestions
 Castle Database
|
| next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: Castle Database |
|
Erik Schmidt Senior Member |
posted 08-05-2000 12:23 AM
  
I was wandering if other castle enthusiasts were interested in seeing a database of existing castles being established. No pictures or extensive text, just it's name, location, age(which period(s) mainly), state of repair and ownership. The database should be set up so it could be added to by anyone with significant information on a castle, with new information going through a database guardian before being listed. I have great trouble getting information on existing castles in an area, that includes so called tourist information, when I travel. I was trying to create my own database, but good information is very hard to come by and mostly covers the same touristly castles. What is needed is information which includes the unknown castles hiding in every corner of Europe and the Middle East. What do you think? Would you be willing to contribute to such a database? What does "Castles on the Web" think? Erik |
|
wurdsmiff unregistered |
posted 08-05-2000 07:26 AM
It's a wonderful idea, though I wonder if you have any conception of the amount of work involved. Personal experience tells me that for every castle site you investigate, you will find three more waiting to join your list of things to do. Covering only existing castles certainly improves viability, though what about the sites which formerly supported castles. Where do you draw the line between existing and former sites. Does a site warrant inclusion if only ground impressions remain or a few ashlar blocks lie in a field, or even a heraldic stone incorporated into a more modern structure? Another point is that in many cases such collections of data have been dependant upon the prolonged enthusiasm of the individuals who have spent years collecting and storing the data at their own expense, and often it is published as a means of re-couping their costs, and so it is protected by copyright or they can can simply be protective of it where future publication is being considered. I personally have no qualms about supplying my data, though spent 30 years gathering information on castle sites in one area of Scotland,and continue to do so because I know there is still so much more to learn. I perceive that even with a large number of researchers assisting, such a project for Europe alone could involve a great deal of work. You will also require a vast amount of web space. One of the objectives behind the Scribe setting up CQ was to provide links to all available web resources on castles, though it is dependant upon members and others providing links. We have an enormous number of links already, and yet we may have only scratched the surface in comparison to what is available in print. Even there records are far from complete. To an extent you are suggesting what has already begun here. I commend the sentiments of the idea, and would encourage it, though have grave reservations about the practicalities of providing such a list on a single site, even when providing such limited data. ------------------ Gordon. [This message has been edited by wurdsmiff (edited 08-05-2000).] |
|
Erik Schmidt Senior Member |
posted 08-05-2000 04:12 PM
No, I doubt if I appreciate the complexities of such a task. I was mainly thinking of including castles and fortifications with significant remains that can be appreciated by a brief visit by a castle enthusiast. My interests lie in Medieval castles, not palaces or cannon forts, and there are a large number of castles, fortifications and ruins of great interest whose very existence is all but a secret. I have travelled extensively to search out castles(despite living in far away Australia) and intend to do so again, but listings on the web are very limited (for most areas) and amassing enough references from the literature would be very very expensive. I would love to have a database such as I suggested just to know where to look. I am not asking anyone to give out their life's work, just an aknowledgement of the more interesting sites they have come across and enough information to let others know what and where it is. For example, on my database I state simply the name of the castle, the town and direction in which it is located, a brief coded desciption such as(13-15c. Hilltop castle or 12c. Donjon, Later additions or 11-13c. Small hillside Castle) and lastly its "ownership" to let others know if it's private, has a museum, open to the public or has council offices etc. Possibly a rating could be added to indicate to others what those that have gone before thought of the site. Thanks for the input, Wurdsmiff. I'm still keen though, as I don't feel like waiting around for the web to catch up to the literature. Erik |
|
Philip Davis unregistered |
posted 08-05-2000 05:25 PM
Trying to maintain a database of just one countries castles is difficult enough. My own database of English and Welsh castles is published on the WWW, with the briefest of discriptions on the bases that those who want more information should seek out the primary sources I list. I don't include ownership since this is actually very difficult to ascertain. There are several other sites that try to have a comprehensive database for a specific country or area, including Wurdsmiff's, but vast areas of the world are very poorly represented on the web, particularly the middle east and the indian subcontient. Personally I think it may be too much for an individual to take on all the worlds castles (even those still standing) and that national and regional databases are all that can realisticly be expected. ------------------ |
|
wurdsmiff unregistered |
posted 08-06-2000 01:35 PM
I again commend your enthusiasm, though retain my reservations. I agree also with all that Philip has said, and add that in order to acheive your goal you will require a great deal of localised input from all the areas you intend to cover. Your biggest pitfall will be that which afflicts us at CQ, that membership and contributions will be relatively intense in some areas, and very thin on the ground in others. You will find that the distribution of information in print is similar to that on the web, although greater in volume, i.e. you will cover the same areas and have similar deficits as regards areas with lower input. You will find much of what you need here and on linked sites,including references to written work which will bulk out your data. I am not attempting to disuade you, rather warning of what you are attempting to take on. I wish you luck should you decide to proceed. ------------------ Gordon. |
|
Merlin Senior Member |
posted 08-11-2000 03:50 AM
The idea's great, but I also don't think that anyone could build such a database in less than 10 or 20 years. I'm collecting information about the 120 castle-sites around Zurich/Switzerland for about 5 years and have only covered 60%. But also if such a website would only contain the basic information, it would be a very, very large list with tens of thousends of names. Have a look, for an example, on that list of swiss castles (sorry, it's in german): http//www.burgen.ch Is that what you would expect? Well, this is already a large list, but still far from complete....(There are about 1'500 sites in Switzerland). You would have to find a whole team of researchers in every country to make that dream come true. Merlin. |
|
Erik Schmidt Senior Member |
posted 08-12-2000 05:45 PM
Thanks for all your input. I think it's only natural I'll get the same variations in input from different areas as occurs on the web, but instead of including massive amounts of info and pictures from some areas, I'll stick to one line per castle, concentrating my efforts on including the lesser known ones. The main problem I think I will have is to decide what to include and what to leave out. I would want the site as a reference to military architecture of the 9th to 15th century, with reference only to sites with significant architectural remains. This would exclude sites with only a few bits of wall or a heraldic stone as well as non military manors/palaces/chateau and sites with only later buildings visible. Thanks for the link to CH Burgen Merlin. This site is getting closer to what I was after, but I would stick to one line per site. This web site also includes castles such as at St Ursanne, which I would not include as there are simply no visible remains. They also list many later manor houses (Chateau) which I would never include as they are non-military structures and/or are 16th to 19th century. I believe the list would be of manageable size once the sites which sadly have little or no remains of the former buildings,as well as the numerous manors and palaces, are excluded. Of the 1500 Swiss sites for example, a list with the above constraints could easily take that to around 200-300. Erik |
|
Walchelin Member |
posted 08-12-2000 09:51 PM
Have you seen this site, Erik? http://www.castles.myweb.nl/wca/index.html Same idea I think, but not quite as comprehensive as what you have in mind. Best of luck! |
|
Marko Senior Member |
posted 08-16-2000 04:04 PM
A castle database like you suggested is a great idea. But I think it's impossible to create. Not only because the huge amount of castles but also because of definitions. Japanese castles are military structures and from the proposed age but they don't fit my definition of a castle. Also which conditions has a site to fulfil to be included in your database. For example you state: > This would exclude sites with only a few bits of wall ... So would this exclude castle sites like http://www.caledoniancastles.btinternet.co.uk/castles/borders/castlehill.htm#posso, or http://www.castles.nl/vliet/vliet.html ? You get my meaning? Again, I think the idea is great but not feasible. ------------------ [This message has been edited by Marko (edited 10-30-2001).] |
|
Erik Schmidt Senior Member |
posted 08-17-2000 01:19 AM
Yes Walchelin, I have visited this site before. It is very different to what I would like to do. They have photos, but no technical information(not even location). I would have no graphics, just a single line of coded info for each castle as I state above. This site suffers from a similar fate as many such sites, it covers just a few castles from most countries(as you say, not quite as comprehensive). Under Spain for example, there are just 7 castles listed. That's pathetic. I have visited 30 Spanish castles/fortifications in one trip, and as such have pics and info for most of them. I could probably easily list 100 spanish castles/fortifications from the tourist literature I picked up. I am after real coverage, not just rehashing what every other site already has. Marko, you're right about the definitions being the difficult part. I case you're curious, I would only list Castlehill castle out of the three linked to. It has a significant keep which is accessible and retains many interesting architectural features. Posso castle on the other hand retains very little to see, it doesn't look to me as it would provide a good idea of building height, structure or method of construction, which Castlehill castle would. The last one is very ruined and on private, inaccessible land. Thus not likely to yield much joy or technical enlightenment. Thanks for your comments, Erik |
|
Philip Davis unregistered |
posted 08-17-2000 02:42 PM
Another thing that you might want to consider Eric is the physical size of such a database. My database of English and Welsh castles contains about 2000 entries, giving name(s), location, source of information (a database that doesn't somewhere list it's source of information is worthless in my opinion) and brief discription but even as such is so large it has to be split into six smaller sections (not ideal since if someone is searching for a particular castle in England but is not sure of the exact location they have to look in five separate batabases- see http://www.castlesontheweb.com/members/philipdavis/Lists/lists.html . Each of these db's is over 100KB and some are nearer 300KB making download times somewhat longer than I like. Also, as you will see, getting even these small batabases viewable on screen is difficult, and my dbs require scrolling from side to side as well as up and down. Personally I'd love to hear from people about ways I might just get my English castles onto one database that would be usable to people with 56k and slower modems. ------------------ |
|
Merlin Senior Member |
posted 08-18-2000 04:09 AM
Erik, considering your comments on Marko's links, I think your definition of what should be in your database makes the whole thing very complicated. Such a collection would only make sense to tourists without very much interest in the historical background of a site, who just want to take good pictures of castles and larger ruins... From my point of view, the definition "worth a visit" should also include sites with little remains of stone buildings, but perhaps more interesting earthworks or stairs and rooms cut into rock, places on a strategicaly important position or with a special historical background. Merlin |
|
Philip Davis unregistered |
posted 08-19-2000 03:55 PM
Personally I deal with the what is 'worth a visit' issue by trying to list everything, including site of castles that no longer exist (since sometimes even the site can have value) otherwise you are just listing your favourite castles. Not that I've any objection to people listing their favourite castles unless they are pretending that their list is anything other than a subjective one. ------------------ |
All times are PT (US) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
|
Contact Us | Castles on the Web
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.40
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 1999.
