French foreign legion hypothesis

1 - Improvised French sniper fortress?

⁠

During the interview with Atlantis Together’s tour guide at the fortress, he says (5:28): ‘’Pour moi, c’est la premier fois j’ai vois ça, mais je ne pense pas qu’il-y-a une civilisation ancienne ici. Je ne pense pas qu’il-y-avait une population qui habité avant ici.’’ = ‘’For me personally, this is the first time I’ve ever seen something like this, but I don’t think there’s an ancient civilisation here. I don’t think there was a population which lived here before.’’

This means that this man has never seen anything like this and thus has no personal or direct knowledge about this structure, and therefore his guess is just as good as anyone else’s. After this, he starts talking about different options of military contexts in the very recent past, but I believe this is due to this being the period which he himself remembers. If he is unfamiliar with the neolithic/bronze age archaeology of this region -which I don’t blame him for because almost nobody is- and he is trying to imagine a very advanced civilisation there 12.000 years ago, I understand why he would tend towards a French explanation. However, the Nouakchittian period between 3500-2700 years ago is the most likely candidate for the creation of these fortresses as agricultural defence settlements.

The tourguide speculates that the fortress was built locally by a group of soldiers as an impromptu defense structure. He assumes that the stone ‘cells’ along the walls are meant for individual snipers to hide behind, but this requires them to lay flat on their stomach.

⁠

In the larger context of this region, this wouldn’t make sense. Imagine the following: a squadron of soldier from around the world serving in France’s colonial Foreign Legion army, in the middle of nowhere in the Sahara. They would look for a high spot on a hill and collect all of these rocks to build a gigantic outline of a fortress, which would hava probably taken several days to complete by hand. The fortress as it stands now is barely any taller than a grown up’s knee, so this group of soldiers would have to lay or sit on the ground at all times in order not to be seen. Even if they are approached by people from a lower valley, they would see a ridge of rocks and people sticking out if anyone decides to stand upright. Also, if soldiers were meant to lie in these ‘cells’, why did they need to have walls in between of them? There is no reson for this if the soldiers are on the same team. Some fortresses contain around 100 cells, so would these all be really nessecary? Overall it just seems like a very strange and impractical way to defend yourself, and it seems way more likely to me that these the foundations of a collapsed enclosure for horses (chariots!), donkeys, bovines, goats or other livestock. In order to prevent animals from attacking or raping each other, they were kept separate, because they were a valuable asset in the oasis/savannah environment (indicating a lifestyle of husbandry alongside pearl millet agriculture, trade and hunting/fishing).

⁠

2 - Permanent French fortress?

A commonly suggested alternative identification is that these structures might have been forts built by the French foreign legion during the 19th century. Many of the ruins are built on elevated regions, which would have created a strategic advantage over approaching enemies. However, pictures and drawings of these French forts clearly show that their floor plans had a very precise, rigid square outline, and that they were built out of some sort of brick. The structures found in the Richat structure however, do have some straight lines and edges, but are more crooked in floor plan layout, as well as their walls being built out of stacked irregular rocks, instead of neat bricks. Another indication that these ruins are most likely not French forts, is that many of the French forts are still in quite a good condition, and are not expected to have been weathered to the ground as much as the Richat ruins in such a short period of time.

⁠

Loading monlegionnaire.wordpress.com⁠

⁠

Jack Wagner, the owner of the French Foreign legion blog ‘Mon Legionnaire’, in response to the ruins from the Richat structure:

I looked at those odd structures and I’m pretty sure that they were not built by the French military, at least not as long term fortifications. They seem to resemble livestock enclosures although I’m not sure what those round corners signify–they might be slightly elevated watch towers. Looking at a 1958 map of the area there are numerous intermittent waterways bisecting the area to the southwest of the “eye”. Also some oases and small villages radiate from the town of Ouadane

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouadane⁠

The area is along an historical caravan/trade route so it’s possible those were shelters for the caravans. They are often called Bordjs and were the literal “caravanserai”. Back in the day these structures kept the pack and herd animals together overnight or for several days before pressing on. Nowadays they might still be used by nomadic herdsmen but it doesn’t look like they are in good condition. It’s an interesting question because the Foreign Legion were indeed known for throwing together improvised walls and defensive structures during their bivouacs. These would be small, like the structures you are pointing out (50m x 50m or so). Over time, if patrols passed the same location, they would continue to add to the walls, towers and interiors. The French were militarily active mostly in the eastern area of Mauritania with still standing forts at Ain Ben Tilli and Chegga. So my conclusion is 90% local caravan structures, 10% chance ad-hoc military enclosures.

For a military force, higher is always better mainly for observation purposes but also you want any attackers to have to climb up to your embrasures. These links will show you an actual ruin of a small French fort in Algeria circa 1900.

https://monlegionnaire.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/fort-el-moungar.pdf⁠

The imagery was crap when I put that together but here are two Google Earth pics (grabbed this A.M.) of what it looks like now. You can see there were two structures. One was the fort that is still standing and the other was very likely a holding pen for the French convoys of the time that contracted camels to bring supplies and water to isolated posts further down the Oued Zousfana.

⁠

The French, particularly the Foreign Legion, would construct their long term fortifications out of abobe bricks made by themselves at the building site as well as making lime ovens for cement and sealing. Ad-hoc enclosures were often built when bivouacking in hostile territory by making use of stones, rocks and boulders to create a slight wall that defenders can stand behind. I presume the local caravans did not shape square rocks to build their enclosures until more recent times. Local rocks and mud would do the trick. The shapes of the French forts vary but I do believe I’ve not seen a triangular fort. I’ve not researched caravanserai to know what their common shapes were.

⁠

Loading…⁠

⁠

Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.

Try clicking the ⋯ next to your doc name or using a keyboard shortcut (

CtrlP

) instead.