Morten St George Theory

[Linda]

Unfortunately, the mountain itself hides view of the merlons in this depiction as well as the lower windows of the tower. Also, I think it highly unlikely that the current château is of the same size and shape, or occupies the same position, as the original fortress.

I said they didn't find it necessary to put a wall around the village, but this doesn't apply to the fortress itself which was on the side of the only pathway up to the top. In the end, the attacking army reached to top on the side of the village. I suspect that the skinny tower you see (not in the VMS depiction) might have been built by the attackers as a lookout pole for guiding their catapult.

Did you ever consider that the mountain could also hide the lack of merlons? It could be hiding elephant statues for all we know, it hides everything but the two towers.

Then, you explain away the second one as being something built by the attackers, since it is not depicted in the vms. 

Why in the world would they build something on top of the mountain to guide their catapult when they obviously would have had to win the mountain to be able to build anything there, not to mention the time and effort that would take for no reason whatsoever, and it certainly wouldnt be done before the bonfire, which appears to be the point of the drawing. Or are you suggesting this second tower was built in the valley but just happens to be higher than the castle tower? Maybe they made it out of the walls that are no longer there?

The simpler answer is that this is not what the vms depicts at all.