[HN Gopher] The secret medieval tunnels that we still don't unde...
___________________________________________________________________
The secret medieval tunnels that we still don't understand
Author : coloneltcb
Score : 57 points
Date : 2026-01-20 19:32 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (weirdmedievalguys.substack.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (weirdmedievalguys.substack.com)
| pessimizer wrote:
| Tunnels through which dogs could carry packages or messages no
| matter what the weather was like and without fear of getting lost
| or interfered with on the way?
|
| The chambers at the ends could have been where the dogs slept and
| were fed.
| mmooss wrote:
| They have only one access point, per the OP, so they don't
| provide transit anywhere.
| nkrisc wrote:
| And then returned the message back to the single entrance?
| crazygringo wrote:
| Based on just this article, it seems far most likely to me that
| it was a place to hide during an attack.
|
| > _And while three brave explorers in the 21st century once spent
| 48 hours in an erdstall, crawling to new sections whenever oxygen
| became scarce, it seems unlikely that they would have been
| constructed as hiding places, even temporary ones. Though they
| could have provided refuge for a small family, why would they be
| accessed from such public spaces?_
|
| I don't see why a whole bunch of people couldn't have hidden in
| them for several hours during an attack/raid? A hiding spot
| sufficiently known to a few, just big enough. And then it makes
| perfect sense the entrance would be in some central public place.
|
| > _The lack of exits is a further strike against this theory--if
| enemies became aware of such a tunnel being used as shelter, it
| would quickly become a death trap for its inhabitants._
|
| Which would contribute to their extreme secrecy. And the loops
| and dead ends and narrow spots make it all the harder for
| attackers to pursue you even if they find it.
|
| > _Besides, in either of these cases, one would expect at least
| some goods to have been left behind--remnants of food or
| clothing, cached or dropped valuables. Instead, there is
| nothing._
|
| If they were intended for hiding for just a few hours, since
| oxygen would run out anyways, it makes sense for nothing to be
| left in there. You rush in and come back out when the raiders
| have moved on. Clothing was valuable, you weren't going to leave
| your shawl behind.
| IAmBroom wrote:
| There's zero reason to expect remnants of food, as well. It was
| not shelf(tunnel)-stable.
| bluGill wrote:
| There would still be signs. The food rots - but it would
| leave traces.
| IAmBroom wrote:
| Only if the tube was used for long enough to need food.
|
| If you are hiding your family from almost certain death, 24
| hours with no food or water in a cool dark cave is a
| possibility.
| alwa wrote:
| Indeed: that would help reconcile the presumed secrecy with the
| fact that, also per the article, there are upwards of _2000_ of
| these tunnel-structures that fall into this category. All
| across Central Europe. Aggressor knows THAT there 's likely a
| safe-tunnel, but doesn't know exactly WHERE the safe-tunnel is,
| and whether it's worth taking the time to find...
|
| For that matter--A place to stash the kids from the census-
| taker and the harvest from the tax man? Tuck them away, just
| for that day, once every so often, and pull them out afterward?
|
| Or knowledge privileged to some specific order, whose
| representatives are geographically widespread but sparse within
| a given community?
| tim-tday wrote:
| No way I'd hide in a hole without another exit. And if I went
| to the trouble to dig a hidey- hole I'd prepare it with a jug
| of water and a snack.
| fatbird wrote:
| As people spent time in them, the oxygen would run out and be
| replaced with carbon dioxide, which is heavier than air and would
| sink to the bottom. With no exits and no airflow, wouldn't this
| become a straightforward deathtrap at some point? Or were there
| ways to force clean air to the bottom, somehow forcing out the
| CO2?
| pluc wrote:
| Seems to me that a secure hiding place that only works for up
| to N hours then becomes a death trap is a really bad concept
| _dain_ wrote:
| Weren't people much smaller in those days? Maybe adult men could
| have fit just fine.
| d_silin wrote:
| Not that small (1.0-1.4m).
| fock wrote:
| TIL hn will tell me about archeology just a bikeride from my
| office.
|
| very fun!
| jurschreuder wrote:
| Maybe it was like a safe. If people wanted to steel something it
| would take them a very long time and they would be very easy to
| stop from ever coming out alive.
| IAmBroom wrote:
| That's what buried silver hoards are for, which have the
| additional advantage of being pretty much unfindable after the
| sod reintegrates overhead.
| cloudhead wrote:
| Hyperion, anyone?
| IAmBroom wrote:
| FTFA:
|
| _This clandestine treatment would have made sense had the
| erdstall been built as escape routes in case of invaders, but
| this can't have been their purpose. They only ever have one
| entrance, usually located beneath the floor of a church or
| farmhouse, or simply under the flagstones of a town square._
|
| That SCREAMS "hidey hole in case of invaders", to me. Like the
| hole Saddam Hussein was discovered hiding in.
|
| If the countryside is overrun with invaders, there's literally no
| place for peasants to escape to. But if you can safely hide until
| dark, you have a chance. If you can wait out until the invaders
| pass through to their objective (strategic castle, opposing
| force...), you survive.
| drcode wrote:
| Maybe they needed a place to store the dodecahedrons?
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_dodecahedron
| socalgal2 wrote:
| precursor to Shape-O-Toy?
| tim-tday wrote:
| That's it!!!
| d_silin wrote:
| Medieval children dug those for fun and games. Explains the size
| and lack of recorded attribution.
| secretsatan wrote:
| Reminds me of the film "The Borderlands", won't spoil anything
| but it's a good bit of eldritch horror.
| kayo_20211030 wrote:
| Is it possible they're the medieval equivalents of dry-wells? Why
| build something big-enough for people if all you want to do is
| accommodate run-off or sewage? What's the geology like; porous
| vs. no-porous? Porous enough for storm drainage, maybe? It seems
| a stretch to call them secret. Why document something as common
| as a drain?
| sharpshadow wrote:
| Heinrich Kusch did some excellent work on this. Here[0] are some
| video documentaries. Some of his findings will blow your mind.
|
| 0. https://www.unterwelt-kusch.com/dokumentation/film-und-
| audio...
| readthenotes1 wrote:
| "passages become seemingly impossibly narrow, as small as 16
| inches (40 centimetres) in diameter. "
|
| Vs
|
| "and the minimum width between armrests is 39.37 cm (15.5
| inches)." https://help.ryanair.com/hc/en-
| us/articles/31352078107921-Se...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-01-20 23:01 UTC)