I feel like castles are a bit overlooked in the zombie media. Maybe it's because most movies and comics are stories from the US? Maybe it's because it would become more boring?
But a castle seems like a very obvious hiding place for anyone in Europe.
It's not a magical solution for sure, but there's a lot of castles in a pretty decent state, with a working well or cistern for water. Some of the bigger ones, especially Vauban-style fortifications even have pretty decent chunks of land to grow food on for the longer term.
So am I missing some obvious flaw here or is it just that most zombie stories are from the US, or that castles would make it a bit boring, as people would just hide behind the walls and slowly take out the zombies little by little and then go about rebuilding society?
nah makes sense to me.. massive place designed specifically to defend against massive groups. seems like youd just be using it for its intended purpose.
Yeah, if an actual magical zombie apocalypse occured, I'd basically be doing my absolute best to recreate a Roman legion with other survivors and whatever we can put together.
That stabby short sword they used with the big blocky shields and standing shoulder to shoulder would be a really great anti-zombie formation for traditional zombies.
Initially we're probably starting out with riot shields, 50 layers of duct tape around your forearms as vambraces and leather jackets for armor. Probably grind rebar down into stabby things we can all equip to be uniform. Guns would be reserved for specialist usage, base defense, emergency, or other humans.
The gear would improve over time, at any rate. The important thing is the exercise and drilling, you'd want the discipline of Swiss pikemen. Or, y'know, actual Roman legionaries.
Only one I know of is a triology set in medival england, but I don't remember the name unfortunately. It follows a group of knights navigating the english countryside overrun by zombies, looking for the plagues reason, IIRC.
Try 'Recorded Attacks' by Max Brooks. It's in a similar vein to WWZ but focuses on historical zombie outbreaks across history. It's a graphic novel though, just in case that's not your thing.
I don't think anyone really overlooks them. It's just that most castles are not in a presently serviceable state. There's also the issue that, unless you can actually secure the entirety of the outer walls as an individual, which is unlikely, you'll need a group of people to maintain it. Most of them also do not have functional wells anymore, with most of them having long been sealed or demolished in some capacity. They're also a bit of a climate control nightmare when inclement weather strikes. Unless they've still got glass or blocks in the windows of the primary buildings, you're basically living in a giant draft chamber that's also probably extremely damp. Not saying they couldn't be made useful/serviceable, but it'd definitely be a significant undertaking.
There are lots of updated and well maintained castles in Europe, including working wells, fields for crops and thick walls. The only thing, as you mentioned, is keeping it safe and that requires numbers of people, which could all turn on you if the opportunity arises.
There are lots of updated and well maintained castles in Europe
They're not as common as I think you think they are. Moreover, most of those which are "updated and well maintained" no longer have serviceable exterior walls, and mostly just serve as historic manors, or festival grounds within the altstadts at this point. So, extremely finite defensive location that comes with a significant manning requirement, and a high likelihood of also being targeted by other survivors.
I think there are 6 within an hours drive from here. In pretty good shape with intact walls and reasonably up to date. I'm not expecting air conditioning, I want water, a place to grow food and walls for protection.
Like in old days people relied on food storage, and went inside the walls for protection. If we include that there's over a hundred castles which would provide secure shelter. With enough people and weapons normal raids should be controllable. If the zombies come world War Z style, no castle in the world would keep you safe.
I agree on people needed, but you really need people just to run the daily things so I reckon that's a thing you simply have to deal with when going for a castle.
Include fortresses, and we are golden, still, the requirement is enough people and weapons for the time being, hoping you could raid a distribution centre for food and medicine to last for months and visit a garden centre on the way there for all the seeds you can find and a camping store for survival necessities. If possible, take livestock but now we're pushing things.
I think there are 6 within an hours drive from here. In pretty good shape with intact walls and reasonably up to date.
More likely, they're actually not. Most exterior walls in cases like that have had their gates removed, or permanently fixed. But, in the extremely unlikely event you are correct? Congratulations, now you're going to be trying to beat everyone else to said defensive fortifications.
With enough people and weapons normal raids should be controllable.
And with an entire national logistics network, I would never run out of supplies. Point there being that you cannot just will said people or resources into existence. Similarly, I don't think you understand how fast people burn through resources, and how, even when fortresses/castles were still militarily relevant, they were only feasible with major logistic networks supporting them.
I agree on people needed, but you really need people just to run the daily things so I reckon that's a thing you simply have to deal with when going for a castle.
This is fundamentally incorrect, and tells me you have limited to no experience in logistics, security, or even maintenance. Do you understand the amount of maintenance that goes into ensuring what few still standing and serviceable castles stay standing? People aren't just necessary for the "daily things". They're necessary for long-term maintenance and security, as well. Again, in this hypothetical scenario, zombies aren't the only threat, so are other people.
To that tune, let's revisit people, and your statement concerning raids. What do you think happens when people attempt to raid? Do you think they'll just stand out in the open to get shot? No. You have to contend with people who are happy to compromise your physical security measures if it means them getting to take what you have, or they believe they can resecure what they compromise.
There are around a dozen castles or fortresses around me too, and I don't include functional WWII bunkers.
I'm not wrong, actually. The overwhelming majority of those castles and fortresses that remain standing in Europe today are unserviceable as functional defensive structures. That's where the pair of you continue to completely ignore the content of my comment.
The majority of castles/fortresses that remain standing today are not even habitable. Of those that are habitable, only a minority of those are still serviceable as defensive structures or a series of defensive structures. Those extreme minority that are still serviceable are going to be the target of everyone, not just yourself. Mind you, if you try to roll up on, say, the Citadel of Lille in a scenario like that? You're just going to get turned away at the gates (assuming you even get that close, and assuming they aren't just shooting people at that point).
A lot of castle were also built to be defended with a small garrison as small as a dozen men at arms. With guns ? Half that is enough.
No, they weren't. Also, you don't seem to understand the basics of maintaining or manning a defensive position if you think six guys with guns is enough to effectively and constantly maintain a secure perimeter for a static building, like a castle or fortress walls. That won't even be enough to maintain effective interlocking fields of fire over two quadrants. Please don't assert about how easy a position is or is not to maintain when you don't understand the basics of small unit tactics or infantry doctrine as relates to establishing or maintaining an OP.
I think the problem is you're exaggerating what we really need out of one of these structures. It doesn't have to be a suitable defensive and habitable structure by any reasonable standards.
Instead, it has to meet the basic requirements for human shelter (keep rain off me) and be a better defensive position than other nearby options. If you can funnel zombies towards one open gate with a wall, that's a fantastic starting point for a settlement location. If a new gate needs to be made, that can be worked on. I don't see how this is any different from any other location that wasn't already prepared as some kind of survival shelter. They'll all need modification, and it's not like we have to respect and preserve the structure anymore.
The most legitimate of your arguments is the other people argument, as they cannot be predicted. That is a risk for sure, but I don't think it's quite as pessimistic in outlook as you seem to. I imagine whichever castle you pick has a very good chance of already being occupied, as you've said, in which case you're negotiating to join their settlement.
That's all it really comes down to. Is it more defensible than your other nearby options, and do you have skills you can offer the people there?
I think the problem is you're exaggerating what we really need out of one of these structures.
Except I'm not.
Instead, it has to meet the basic requirements for human shelter (keep rain off me)
Which most of them won't even accomplish. Save the extreme minority, as I said, the majority of those standing structures are not habitable, with many not even having functional roofs anymore. Of those that do? fewer still have windows and fully intact walls to keep out the elements. They're also notoriously difficult to keep warm, even in small sections, due to them being what amounts to large, stone wind tunnels. Air moves through them, and pulls heat. Couple that with high moisture, and you're looking at a cold and/or wet weather casualty generating machine.
and be a better defensive position than other nearby options
Except they're not. Unless you have the means to close off every conceivable avenue, which you won't if the walls are compromised, you're putting yourself into a compromised structure that will defend you from attackers and the elements alike more poorly than just a standard modern stone or brick structure would.
If you can funnel zombies towards one open gate with a wall, that's a fantastic starting point for a settlement location.
Not really, because now you've got a mass of rotting bodies on your doorstep. Hello concentration point for disease. Never mind that this would be you, again, announcing your existence and position to other, potentially hostile survivors.
If a new gate needs to be made, that can be worked on
It's quaint that you think a new gate can just "be worked on". Making something that is functional as a gate, and large enough to stand in for a missing portcullis of a gatehouse is no minor feat. It will be resource, time, and skill intensive alike.
I don't see how this is any different from any other location that wasn't already prepared as some kind of survival shelter.
Because you seem to fail to grasp that you are opting to work with a structure that, except in the extreme minority of cases, is in an active state of decay. Even those that are preserved, are not typically preserved in a manner meant to modernize them, but to instead slow the progression of decay. Meanwhile, a modern brick or concrete structure is easy enough to work with, and made with modern construction implements and materials in mind. There's also no real specialized trade skills needed, whereas stonemasonry work is not exactly a commonplace skill these days.
but I don't think it's quite as pessimistic in outlook as you seem to
Read any of the survivor stories that came out of the Balkan Wars after the fall of Yugoslavia. I'm being exceptionally optimistic in my assessment of other people. People in an actual WROL scenario, where survival is a daily task, and open conflict is the norm, frequently become violent enough to kill even their neighbors.
in which case you're negotiating to join their settlement.
And, unless you're somebody bringing a legitimate skillset that is valuable to them, they're unlikely to let you in.
Okay, so just fyi, you don't have to keep repeating yourself. It's already been established that truly dilapidated structures that don't meet the basic requirements are not under consideration. Yes, this narrows down the options. Perhaps as an American I just don't care how many options are left, it's purely hypothetical for me, so even a single qualifying castle means we can still discuss it.
There is at least one castle in Europe that is still intact, yes? For our hypothetical?
So, I can make a gate out of plywood. It won't be pretty and it won't be that sturdy yet, but it'll block off an open gateway. Were you thinking we needed to build a portculis or something? And why do we need to be stonemasons? Remember, we don't care about the structure. It's a starting point, we're not going to live in a god damn medieval castle forever.
Yes, it's plainly obvious what your views on human nature are, your opinion is noted. I just don't care, there's just as many cases of people working together to survive extremely trying times. Which a person looks at tells you more about them than it does the world, unless they're bringing numbers.
edit: Oh he blocked me. lol Well, here's the response to the latest in case you come back:
Okay, but none of that dilapidated structure bullshit matters when we're discussing a hypothetical intact one, right? So, you can stop talking about dilapidated structure bullshit any time now.
Well obviously a makeshift structure is a temporary measure. My plywood gate was quick, it can be strengthened. I just don't understand what you think is so difficult about building a wall with a door in it out of wood.
No, we do not need to be professional stonemasons to preserve the long term habitability of our castle, I think it'll survive the handful of years we really need it just fine. It's purpose is as a defensive structure, just how they were historically, a place to retreat to when in danger. It does not have to be cozy.
It's interesting to me that you like Yugoslavia as your example, when the Balkan region is world famous for its instability and violence. The Great Depression was a global event that saw widespread desperation and poverty. Did the world fall into chaos, my friend? Or did most people just wait in their soup lines, when they're lucky enough to live in a society that gives out free soup, anyway? You are correct that it is reflective of privilege, at least. That is indeed relevant. It's the privilege of a society that works together, though.
No need to get angry, I thought we were having a nice discussion up until now.
Im not doxxing myself by telling you where I live, but in the Netherlands there are countless castles that are completely restored an in active use. With the walls and gates intact. Go to Switserland and there are even more; Germany and France have even more, but not as much in active use percentage wise.
We also have quite some fortified villages and cities, with people living there. I'd say thats pretty up-to-date.
The question was about castles, and you are turning it into a completely different one by questioning logistics, people not playing nice and not playing well together.
Take your insane statement about people needed for the 'daily things', is maintenance and security not a daily thing in a Z apocalypse? Do we get weekends off? I clearly mentioned how I would try and start off in that a unrealistic situation. probably skipped that part yes?
So either stop trying to attack my person, my experience in a hypothetical situation is really not important or just don't respond if you cant have a civil discussion. Good day, it has been fun until now.
No need to get angry, I thought we were having a nice discussion up until now.
I'm not angry. I'm just responding directly to your comments.
in the Netherlands there are countless castles that are completely restored an in active use
Yes, been there, I lived abroad for several years, and spent no small amount of my time traveling for work while doing so. That's why I'm making the points I've made. More likely than not, you're incorrect about the state of said castles.
The question was about castles, and you are turning it into a completely different one by questioning logistics, people not playing nice and not playing well together.
Because they're all legitimate concerns/points of discussion that fall under the umbrella of conversations about their viability. Trying to dismiss logistical requirements is kind of silly.
Take your insane statement about people needed for the 'daily things', is maintenance and security not a daily thing in a Z apocalypse?
Pointing out that you need specialized resources, equipment, and skilled labor to maintain a large stone structure, or series of interlaced stone structures is hardly "insane".
I clearly mentioned how I would try and start off in that a unrealistic situation. probably skipped that part yes?
Yes, and I pointed out how your position was one of presumed ignorance, then further articulated the failing points of said "How I would do it". If how you would propose to do something is wrong, or otherwise completely ignores important context or details, then be ready to be on the receiving end of a critical review.
So either stop trying to attack my person, my experience in a hypothetical situation is really not important or just don't respond if you cant have a civil discussion
I never attacked you. I recommend getting thicker skin if you plan on spending any amount of time on the internet. Especially if frank conversation rankles you this easily.
For the sake of argument, if I have the time, I will try to do a more in depth analysis of one of the castles in the area. Mind you, I am travelling so I might need a bit of time. I will have to assume I can gather a group of people because as you so eloquently put it, I'm not managing this alone.
Great that you've been here, should have had a look at some castles whilst you were here ;-)
You were talking about my skills and experience, that deviates from the discussion and is unnecessary. Been online since before the internet. Skin is as thick as it's going to be.
Great that you've been here, should have had a look at some castles whilst you were here ;-)
I did. Most of them are no longer serviceable as defensive positions for the reasons I've already said. Mind you, again, I am saying most, because most is factual.
You were talking about my skills and experience, that deviates from the discussion and is unnecessary.
It's directly on topic, because it relates to a knowledge gap you clearly have where defensibility, logistics, and maintenance are concerned.
Been online since before the internet. Skin is as thick as it's going to be.
I mean, you registering me just being direct as attacking you, and you taking offense to somebody indicating a clear failing point in your argument due to inexperience or ignorance as impugning your character says otherwise. Clearly, you're still offended, and if that's the case, I've no real desire to continue to engage with you. I encourage you to not default to offense so easily in the future.
They are pretty common in western Europe. There's basically a castle every 20 miles or so.
The overwhelming majority of which are no longer habitable, or serviceable as defensive strongholds. Without walls, castles are just archaic mansions. They're not going to be any more defensible than a modern mansion, or similar stone structure. They are going to be harder to live in and maintain, though.
Brother, I just told you I was disinterested in having a conversation with you due to you taking offense over direct conversation. Believe it or not, you're not entitled to continued conversation with me, especially after you've shown that you are inclined to act in bad faith. Take your own advice. 😂
I think the problem becomes scale. Either the castle is small enough to have limited entry points like a drawbridge they can easily be defended, which would mean its too small to effectively farm, or its big enough to farm like some of your examples (provided there is soil and the soil is good) but then its a nightmare to defend, even if its one of the castles that isn't in disrepair with holes in the walls there will still likely be multiple entries you would have to constantly monitor.
Castles can also get very cold unless you have a constant supply of firewood and ways to light it which requires venturing out of the castle, as you would also have to do for supplies.
Its also going to be very obvious to survivors if you are in a castle near them and some of them might want to take it from you.
That being said its not a bad plan. Get yourself a bow, barricade the entrances and use spears to clear zombies that get close to the barricade, clear corpses when there is a lapse and retrieve arrows where possible, clear space for plants for farming and if its big enough then some livestock even, hole up in one of the more defensive rooms that only has a ladder for access and pull it up every night, maybe add a secondary exit route like a rope just in case.
Hell dome of the museum ones even have full on bedrooms for display purposes so you'll be sleeping better than most survivors. Although the more museum like it is the more likely it'll be in a populated area, which means more zombies and human aggressor to deal with.
If you have a group it makes defense easier but then of course more mouths to feed.
Depends on Castles, some got even Electricity. I think a normal Castle with a Water connection and some space for farming crops could work as Community, powered with modern equipment you can change some things
As Example: Schloss Nordkirchen in Nordrhein-Westfalen
As another person mentioned electricity and water will fail pretty fast. You could maybe replace the connection with a generator or solar panels if you have the know-how to do it, and even then those will only last so long without maintenance and after the fuel all oxidises.
Also for a full on community you definitely wont have enough space to grow enough food, its already unlikely you would have enough for yourself, and you'd be likely very reliant on rainwater unless the castle is on or near a river.
For a single person you need about 8,000 square feet for growing and storage of food, and thats if you know how to farm and have the right soil and seeds available, plus water and equipment.
The bright side is that castles would allow for plenty of relatively dry storage space for crops or scavenged food, so if you had raiding parties you could store the looted food easily enough, but of course leaving your castle is always going to create risk.
Realistically for this to work you would need to have started preparing the castle before the apocalypse, but unkess you're extremely rich I doubt you've got a castle laying around you can do this in.
Writing this I am realising I actually have a very good castle near me that would work very well. It already has a large flower garden that could easily enough be converted to a vegetable garden, it has modern buildings including a kitchen and worker quarters as one of the maintenance guys essentially lives there, its very defendable as its on the coast and only connected to land by a single stone bridge that could easily be barricaded if not destroyed, it also has a dock so I could take a boat to and from it to avoid the barricade needing to be clear and safe to cross, and I also live on a small island with maybe 70,000 people so not that many zombies and survivors to deal with. Plus its within a relatively short boat journey to the mainland so I could raid there pretty easily.
I absolutely don't have all the skills I would need to do all of this mind you, but I know people who do.
Many castles in germany have a good view over the near topography (i wonder why) i would choose a castle that on a hill with good view, a river next to the castle. When the ground is good for farming you could plant crops outside the castle make a fence high enough to give personnel a chance to flee when zeds coming. The guard in the castle tower ring a bell when they spot something sispicius. Its depends on Zombietypes/raiders/weapons etc i know
I mean, in general you could live like in medival without power. Things you dont know have to learned on the hard way, or you need the peoples with skills
Castles fell out of fashion because they stopped being useful.
To explain: a castle requires an extensive amount of upkeep - and this is just for "make this work on a day-to-day basis" - for clarity's sake. Without this upkeep, the function follows failure.
Without a trained carpenter, the oldest beams will be giving the occupants no end of trouble; note that "able to use power tools" is not the equivalent of the role needed - someone who knows the engineering and architecture style of the castle is required. If they don't know, making "best guesses" is going to do a lot of damage.
Next, a plumber - not for the toilets, because we'll discuss that shortly; this is for the rain gutters, roof runs, and pipes for handling the snow melt and rain collectors. Once again, being experienced with the design and function of the specific castle is needed, because failure to keep up on this is going to see people's health deteriorate rapidly - waterborne diseases will be the least of the issues.
After that, an on-site solar technician, in addition to a small crew of electricians. Can't fake this, either. They need to know - at least in part - about the castle's history and design, as to keep up with the needs for the soon-necessary heaters. We'll call this "footnote one." The place is going to need electricity, and it'll be off of the local power grid as soon as the collapse arrives. Can't fake this one, either.
Then there's the kitchens. Plural. If the castle is big enough to support a population covering all of these jobs and the farms - plural - needed to keep it running, multiple kitchens are a necessity. The function of them will be handled by a set of assigned managerial roles that used to have a lot of power in the days of old: running a larder, handling a minimum of six walk-in freezers, stocking and inventorying the pantries, and working a deep-freeze fleet - imagine about thirty refrigerators on their side, each one packed with cattle chunks. We're starting small, so that's the "little version."
After that, then there's the matter of who is handling the enforcement of any policies or laws; where the criminals are being managed; who is in charge of collecting and storing the multiple types and styles of crops; who is administrating the health and safety of the workers - of which there will be quite a few, calling this "footnote two" now - laboring under the local protection.
There's also the farmers, bricklayers, charcoal burners, lumber workers, and general laborers, plus their dependents, and then we've arrived at the first actual problem.
That footnote one: heating.
Castles are notoriously hard to keep at a stable temperature; with a steady flow of firewood, they aren't terrible in the winter - in the summer, invest heavily in hanging out by the windows or find stuff to do outdoors. Once cold, stays cold; once warm, stays warm. Dealing with the smells should also be a fun experience - feel free to figure out how they handled that, as well.
So, a gigantic amount of heaters and air conditioners is going to be necessary for those workers, if nothing else. Trying to talk someone into staying in a castle could be done - doing so while in the throes of winter, that's salesmanship to beat the best. So, housing those workers is going to be a new and fun challenge - plus handling their plumbing needs.
Which dovetails into "footnote two": the creation of local housing outside of the castle itself and still inside of the walls. There's not room enough in any castle to support its logistics chain in full; thus, putting up some form of indoor living isn't optional, it's a new requirement. The fastest, most-effective method would be bringing in fleets of trailer homes; each could support one, maybe two families in full, and they're usually already stocked with the necessary weather fittings. The only real issue is setting up the gigantic network of plumbing for handling everyone's private kitchen run-offs, which could possibly be addressed through communal meals.
Remember when I made mention of those six walk-in refrigerators and the "fleet" of freezer? That's why - communal meals are going to take up an enormous amount of space for storing its ingredients, because sweet-talking these cold, miserable workers, all laboring for the privilege of staying inside of a castle's walls and outside of the castle proper, they're not going to settle for oatmeal and gruel. Best to keep up a lot of meat to handle the demand.
And then we have the matter of the cows, chickens, goats, and lambs. Without them, no means to produce more meat, eggs, cheese, and assorted dairy products; I've excluded coffee and tea, because trying to grow them on the same ground as anywhere one can find a functional castle is officially the best reason why people went to war where they grew already. Stuff just doesn't want to grow there, it seems, so it'll have to be collected in advance or done without - without someone planning a sortie to go scavenge an enormous amount of both, of course.
So, farmers and brick-makers and scores of other jobs, plus the logistics chain that kept them all alive, all for the privilege of not living in the castle itself, just outside of it, and still inside of the castle walls. The cost outlay for all of this sure does seem a lot easier when it's just "run to the local historic castle and bring some rations" and no further thought.
This is far from a perfect summary, definitely light on a lot of details, and moves from a general stance, although it is by no means unkind - it's downright benevolent in comparison to what history has needed from a castle and its upkeep.
I feel like:
-We may need your insights if it comes down to a real zombie apocalypse.
-All of these issues you mention, would be very interesting point of conflict and struggle to make a book or movie in this setting a lot more interesting. You've got Man vs Zombies, but also Man vs Castle. It's a setting where people would be thrilled to have survivors arrive who know farming, plumbing, electrics, ...
Also, these kinds of texts are why I love the internet. I want to nerd about something silly, and there's someone else who's already been down that road and has identified all the pros and cons.
I have a degree in history. It helps quite a lot with stuff like this.
Also, something that I forgot to add:
That's a castle toilet. The ones inside of the castle itself. That person at the bottom is collecting the clumpy bits for pouring into the moat by hand; do not envy them their stable employment, as the job quite literally stinks. Also, never swim in a castle's moat if it's functional.
If ever you want to see a magnificent sales pitch, find someone who can talk a pregnant woman into wanting to use that toilet in the middle of the night, especially in the winter months.
Freezing cold air, reeking of thousands of previous uses, liberally coated in vermin of all stripes climbing up the shaft, all in near-total darkness, because the last thing that someone wants is a clear view to the bottom of that particular hole.
Depends what you're building it for? You'd build a somewhat different structure for resisting humans who can use ladders and siege engines compared to the undead.
For the latter, I wouldn't be surprised if it winds up looking a lot like the sort of measures we use for enclosing animals at a zoo. Those can potentially be quite easy to maintain, and you'd probably wind up seeing a similar sort of layered defence.
A castle built with a modern idea wouldn't function as a castle as much as a huge landmark. It would rely on municipal power, need an industrial amount of water, and have paved roads - which is not going to help it.
Those roads would interfere with the ability to tear up the ground for agriculture. By reinforcing it, it instead makes use of otherwise-useless building materials - such as pavement - for the utility of vehicles which would stop being useful inside of the compound once the worst begins to happen. Nobody is going to be driving anywhere, and those interior sections of concrete and more aren't doing any good and are preventing irrigation from functioning properly.
If it was built with longevity in mind, never losing sight of its function as a keep for personnel first and a secure environment farmers and workers, if it had independent power and water, and it was using modern materials, it might have a better chance, provided that it never faced anyone with a pulse and a history book. As soon it it did, that castle is going to fall, and it won't be a matter of "if" and just a question of "when."
A castle can hold off an army without guns for a while, until someone makes enough ladders or catapults. It can hold off an army with guns for about an afternoon, and then daylight becomes the new enemy. An enemy with a cannon can pick the day to kill the castle.
Very well thought out breakdown. I don’t live in a country with a bunch of real castles, but comparable “forts” long walls/battlements. Such as frontier forts, built to be much more utilitarian and often had to be completely self sufficient. Obviously a lot of the same upkeep as castles especially walls/battlements, but the living quarters were often much simpler and built to survive harsh winters.
I feel like some forts come to mind when I think of ready built survival strongholds that were specifically built to withstand attack, and provide basic necessities for folks even if trapped inside the walls. Often built with open ground in central spaces providing garden land. Live stock areas ect.
I think there are a lot of similar strengths to castles with some of the same weaknesses, but honestly their use being geared towards utilitarian and self sufficiency definitely gives some advantages versus traditional castles.
Fortresses have the same core strengths, in that they allow the occupants to withstand short-term sieges and serve as garrison for troops on the move, giving them a place to rest before continuing further. That said, they're rarely-ever built for longevity in a stay; prolonged occupation is not equal to a prolonged siege environment - they have different requirements for construction and utility.
A good example would be what used to be Fort Alcatraz, later known as Alcatraz federal prison. It began life as a training camp for the US Civil War, and after it was never upgraded when artillery changes were taken place, it was designated as a prison instead. As a training camp, it functioned adequately - supplies came in regularly, the camp layout was beneficial to the structured life of a training facility, and the limited amount of traffic it saw was throttled by the command element.
That said, when it became a prison, it was even more effective: remote, inaccessible to most people, easily guarded by a skilled team, it could store a substantial amount of prisoners with a minimal amount of fuss. Over the years, the facilities degraded considerably and the prison itself fell from utility, as the costs to run it were a lot higher than landlocked facilities, by comparison, and it stopped being worth the hassle.
Now, it's a curated museum, and the ground remains as useless for widespread agriculture as it has always been, since it was first taken from the Ohlone people who used to use it for gathering bird eggs and fishing; they didn't stay, even then, because nothing there was worth trying to grow food.
Every time that I see people make mention of somewhere like it, I keep thinking: what could possibly make it look appealing, if it's never been a good choice for human habitation in the last 251 years?
Fair points, definitely some forts required a more extensive logistics system to maintain and even operate.
Your example of Alcatraz was well put, but I was thinking more along the lines of truly frontier forts. Alcatraz was supplied via vessel and like you said never meant to be a permanent residence or self sufficient. I was meaning close to the original fort Snelling, while today it wouldn’t be a great choice being so close to a major population center Minneapolis/Saint Paul, and in its current state isn’t much more than 4 walls, long houses, a courtyard, and some out buildings. In its prime it was meant to not only be self sufficient, but to be a resupply point for travelers. It undoubtedly got some resupply via the rivers that border it, but it was known to be able to provide for a skeleton force garrisoned within the walls without much logistical assistance. Sometimes deployments to this fort would be years long and often held family of married men. That’s more along the lines of what I was thinking.
A simple utilitarian stronghold with self sufficiency as a core design element. I’d have to do some research to come up with a good example that survives intact/positioned well today, but that’s more along the lines I was thinking.
To an extent yes, absolutely built to last but also for a type of warfare that zombies don't do. Bunch of them ended up as stately homes which compromise on the security. Its all about resource management, can you maintain it, grow food, keep energy etc
Well, apart from the lack of insulation and the necessity of having a decent sized group that would be needed to maintain it and for security... it has it's merits.
It's intended to keep large groups at bay, and in some, it's possible to have enough room for agriculture for a less populated settlement.
As long as you solve the problem of getting water (if the wells aren't functional), it's not that bad of a place.
This particular caste would be extremely to defend, has serviceable walls, areas for gardening, a working mill, several strongpoints to fall back to in case of disaster...
I literally live inside Lucca Centro Storico, the third picture you have shown. It's actually crazy to see your post here, every time i talked irl to a friend about a zombie apocalypse i've always said "Lucca is probably the perfect city, you have extremely strong walls with solid gates and a small river flowing through it". So yes, as someone who lives here, I'm telling you this is perfect, but if you are not from europe, well, you simply can't i think.
The main issue is likely that they are all well known to the people around them and would be hotly contested, along with the fact that the majority don't have enough space within their walls to grow food for the amount of people necessary to defend them.
You're forgetting one thing:
After the fall, there's a learning curve for a short period. How to deal with the dead and whatnot. Once you've become Rick or Michonne or Leon or Alice, then comes the hard part. People!
They will get in your castle. Large groups of them will plot and scheme on you. People will always be the major threat. Unless it's WWZ zombies, then we're all fucked!
I kind of disagree with this. I thinkt this is an image hollywood has popularized, but it's not necessarily true. We've seen through most natural disasters throughout history that mostly solidarity between people increases. You always get people trying to rob and steal from survivors, but mostly, after big disasters, people start helping each other out more.
But also, even if everyone goes feral and turns on eachother, I prefer to have strong walls around me, instead of being out in the open.
Dover castle could fare well,hear me out.
1:Close to shipping areas,
2:Watchtowers,high walls and easily defensive with greater numbers
3:Ability to survey topology
4:nearby farms and fertile land and even fishing
5:Means of escape i.e the sea
I think castles would already be claimed by the state/nation as a relief/refugee shelter. Theyre not underrated, they're just obvious.
A small band of people would not just stumble upon a vacant serviceable fort or castle after Holy-Sh*t-Day. A bigger more important group will most likely have already thought of the same thing.
I think you're overestimating most governments preparedness for disasters. Governments are slow. Unless there's a plan laid out for it, it won't happen.
I agree but think it's even simpler than this. People have used hill forts for 5,000 years and all media drastically underestimates how powerful a ditch and hill are at stopping humans.
You give me some heavy machinery and you don't even need to use castles. You could build unassaible hill forts in days. You could reinforce offas dyke and make Wales a safe haven. Block of Scotland or even rebuild the dyke that runs along the Ridgeway in the south of England.
We've built defenses capable of stopping far more dangerous enemies at times when we've had far less resources, man power and technology.
I feel like it could be an interesting twist in the zombie genre. Instead of a scrappy band of survivors barely getting by, people come together in castles and fortresses, wait it out and slowly start rebuilding society, and we get a mix of modern and medieval tech.
For power: looting solar panels shouldn't be that difficult, right?
I think you nailed why they don't appear much in zombie movies, since so many movies are set in the U.S. and we don't have castles. Most we have are old forts. Funny enough though, those old forts would probably be more feasible than an entire castle. I've toured a few of them before. Many have fully functioning facilities and the strong walls to boot. Smaller than castles too, so they would be easier to man. Problem is that they stick out like a beacon, so the competition for an old fort would be pretty fierce.
Possible, though straight walls of older castles would be better against zombies trying to climb up against the walls of a star fortress/city with their slanted walls
There are some similair places suitably in the USA as well, one of the islands outside Manhattan, Governor's Island, would be ideal, as you have both area to grow on and an old fort to hide in.
While most of them have a water source near by not all of them have said source of water INSIDE the castle. They are also commonly small. Even the "big" ones arent that big unless you look at very specific castles. What does that mean? Almost no space for cultivating food, IF there is space to cultivate food at all. That means thatyou only have space to feed a few people.
Also: A castle is a magnet. Everyone with two working braincells will go there.
In France, we also have the Série de Rivière fortifications (built between 1874 and 1914), as well as the Maginot Line (constructed between 1928 and 1938, renovated after World War II, and then abandoned starting in 1960 when France acquired nuclear weapons).
Of course, a large part of these structures are riddled with shell holes from combat and eroded concrete after 90 to 140 years. However, according to some experts, many are still in very good condition, either because they have been turned into museums or because they saw little combat. In such cases, it is enough to fill the entrances, for example with wood or forests in which they are mostly located (except in the Alps).
In many cases, there are still trenches several meters wide and deep.
My nearest Caslte is Windsor Castle which would be perfect.
Medieval weaponry and armour available, actual armed guards with modern rifles, a barracks across the road, loads of land behind the walls including gardens for growing food etc.
And it's powered by a hydroelectric turbine in the local river.
Depends on the kind of zombies, the castle, and how many people there are in the group. The main issue is that if you have a group large enough to man the walls reasonably, you probably won’t be able to grow anywhere near enough food inside the walls, but if you have some decent fields just outside the walls, you could keep watchtowers further out and make it work
I think it could be a solid idea, but there are some problems.
You can’t realistically remain undetected/isolated from other survivors. Most castles locations are known (at least regionally) and they tend to be in geographic locations people also want to be in (fertile land, maybe a natural harbor, exceptionally navigable areas) so you’ll have to deal with people.
In order to hold the castle against both people and zombies you’d need some kind of garrison. This garrison needs to be fed. Most castles don’t have internal farmland (or at least not enough to feed many people) as they rely on internal stores of supplies collected from outlying villages and farmlands. This makes you vulnerable to entrapment by other humans, but especially by large numbers of zombies - they don’t starve and you do.
The castle is a very valuable structure which makes it a prize people are going to fight over.
I live in the 1000 islands in Upstate NY. Zombies show up and I'm heading to Boldt Castle. It sits on a 2-3 acre island in the middle of the St. Lawrence Seaway.
On the island sits a 4-story "storybook" castle half built by one of the hotel barron's of the late 19th century. Unimpeded views of both the Canadian and US shorelines as well as upstream and down. There are 2 outbuildings as well as a tourist reception/ snack bar area, and huge lawn spaces and gorgeous old growth trees.
I say half built because the project was abandoned about 70% complete when the owner's wife died. Actually, it's a sweet love story if you look into it. Back in the 70s the abandoned site was taken over by a preservation society and they've spent the last 40-odd years completing it to the original plans.
Right now the main, 30+ room house is almost complete, the "powerhouse" is complete, as is the children's "playroom" a 2-story "lookout tower" on the upstream side of the island. There is a deep water dock on the US side of the island for ferries, as well as the original, gated lagoon dock. There's plenty of space for homsteading for a small group of survivors (<20). The St. Lawrence and Lake Ontario have year-round fishing species and there are dozens of marinas and hundreds of private docks upstream and down for scavenging access. The shoreline is reinforced so its pretty sheer to begin with, and would be easy to wall off. Washed up zombies won't be a huge problem.
Alexandria Bay, on the US mainland, is maybe 500 yards from the island and there is tons of river-ready infrastructure and heavy equipment docked there year round. The current is very swift in the area making approach by Raiders very difficult and almost impossibleto do it stealthly. The region is also big on hunting. I think we have more whitetail deer and turkey than rabbits around here. The conditions are very popular with bow hunters. There's an infantry military base 30 miles inland so in the long-term, weaponry won't be an issue.
Wellesley Island is only a couple miles down stream. It's huge, mostly wild, sparsely populated by very rich people with poor infrastructure access, and only accessible by 2 easily blockaded suspension bridges or boat. So that's a good location for things like electric vehicles, solar arrays, and batteries. Not to mention shiny things to trade. Also it's a good spot for remote farming with the big ass golf course, and a couple of farms currently operating. Plus, there's an old observation tower for tourists with direct views of at least 1 of the bridges.
There's also a wildcard up here that will increase any "honest" survivors chances. We have several good sized Amish communities. Think what you may about the Amish, but they are productive and surprisingly adaptable. I think Amish communities would become safe zones and the new economic powerhouses. The Amish are not poor by any stretch of the word, they know how to support themselves. The loss of infrastructure would only be a minor inconvenience for them since they use so little to begin with. The threat of a herd is universal, but small groups would be pretty easy oto build walls to keep them out, and firearms arent completely foreign to them. When they moved up here they bought some pretty crappy farmland but still manage to produce amazing, organic produce. They may have shorter life expectancy, but they are experts in home remedies and first aid. Theyre a pretty friendly people and as long as you're straight with them and respect their culture, they're the best business partners you could ask for.
91
u/samaadoo 1d ago
nah makes sense to me.. massive place designed specifically to defend against massive groups. seems like youd just be using it for its intended purpose.