Talk:Opus spicatum

"it is inherently weak"
This observation cannot be exact, in a village next to mine Ivry-la-Bataille there is a carolengian fortress built partly in opus spicatum (many walls and the oldest and thickest tower). I doubt that this technic used in military architecture was used for esthetic purpose. I doubt that it is "inherently weak" as the fortress is still standing today and has resisted many battles since its construction. My theory is that this type of structure as a very good resistance to lateral movements. Indication, it has been used in France in humide places such as Normandy Loire and Rhône valleys. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.203.165.248 (talk • contribs) 13 April 2009, 20:21
 * It's not necessarily "weak", so much as dependent on mortar strength to maintain its vertical compressive strength. A high wall must rely on mortar to support the frictional forces between stones, where a regular bond simply rests them above each other. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:27, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Are you really sure?
Hi!

In France we use 2 different names. Opus spicatum (ear of wheat) and Opus pistacum (fish bone) -if you see what I mean- and I think you souldn't write « Wall in opus spicatum. » in the caption of the second picture, « Wall in opus spicatum. » because you can see horizontal stones in the middle of the pic.

If you want to discuss, please ping me on my Fench talk page and I'll come back here to answer. Thx. --Llann .\m/ (Lie 2 Me ...) 02:00, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Is that in relation to new work or to ancient Roman work? Opus spicatum is the only term I've seen in English-language sources for the ancient work. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:30, 9 April 2016 (UTC)