>>46091
That is a double wall, and that would be a good idea for the reason you described: one more wall to scale. But the second line should be higher at least a bit, and neither of them should have parapets on the inside. That way from the second wall they can be attacked with bows or even with stones or javelins, etc. and they couldn't hide behind the parapet. And the second line should not have parapet for similar reason (can be attacked from further back from the ground or the next ring of wall). So the double wall isn't a bad idea, but it was done poorly.
My real problem is this section. Towers should be high platforms to attack enemy from above, and those towers would be awesome to keep the attackers at the base of the walls under fire. But for that the tower has to be forward from the wall a little, and they moved it back creating a space where noone would attack because there are better ones right on the sides of the gate. No reason to build that corner of the wall like that, the ground should be a problem since they did the same on the other side with the other tower, so it was a decision of aesthetics not an architectural/engineering one. And not a military for sure. They even would have gained more space inside the town.
And then the second ring, why aren't towers on the corners? And instead of those bs round wall sections? A tower instead of those would be way better for placing troops or even catapults or scorpions.
REEE